^^Rv  OF  P^ii^icefo^ 


s^fotoGicAL  se«\^ 


BOOKS  BY  THE  SAME  AUTHOR 

35 

cents 

THE  SYNOPTIC  PROBLEM 

i6mo.     Net, 

THE  GIFT  OF  TONGUES 

i6mo.     Net, 

SO 

cents 

THE  MOST  BEAUTIFUL  BOOK  EVER  WRITTEN 

PAUL  AND  HIS  EPISTLES 

i2mo.     Net,  75 
Crown  8vo.     Net, 

cents 
I2.00 

Biblical  Introduction  Series  ( 

\ 

V 


JOHN  AND  HIS 
WRITINGS 


By 
D.  A.  "HAYES 

Professor  of  New  Testament  Interpretation  in  the  Graduate  School  of  Theology 
Garrett   Biblical  Institute 


THE  METHODIST  BOOK  CONCERN 

NEW  YORK  CINCINNATI 


Copyright,  19 17,  by 
D.  A.  HAYES 


The  Bible  text  used  in  this  volume  is  taken  from  the  American 
Standard  Edition  of  the  Revised  Bible,  copyright,  1901,  by 
Thomas  Nelson  &  Sons,  and  is  used  by  permission. 


TO 

WILLIAM  DAVID  SCHERMERHORN 

MY   FORMER   PUPIL  AND   PRESENT  ASSOCIATE 
A  MAN  OF  JOHANNINE  EXPERIENCE  AND  LIFE 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Foreword 9 

PART  I.     THE  APOSTLE  JOHN 

I.  John  the  Little  Known I5 

IL  John  the  Unrecorded  and  Disregarded 22 

III.  John  in  the  New  Testament 26 

IV.  John  in  Tradition  and  Legend 34 

V.  John  the  Son  of  Thunder 44 

VI.  John  the  Saint  and  Seer 55 

PART  II.    THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL:  THE  GOSPEL 
ACCORDING  TO  JOHN 

I.  Some  Remarkable  Estimates 77 

II.  Some  Remarkable  Omissions 80 

III.  Some  Remarkable  New  Features 89 

IV.  A  Remarkable  Work  of  Art 92 

V.  Other  Remarkable  Characteristics 97 

VI.  Occasion  and  Aim no 

VII.  Contents 114 

VIII.  The  Johannine  Authorship  Disputed 119 

IX.  Discoveries  Favorable  to  Authenticity 127 

X.  Was  John  an  Early  Martyr? 129 

XL  Claims  of  John  the  Presbyter 136 

XII.  Evidence  Favorable  to  Authenticity 142 

XIII.  Opposition  and  Defense;  Conclusion 151 

PART  III.     THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN 
I.  What  Shall  We  Call  It? I59 

II.  Relation  to  the  Fourth  Gospel 163 

III.  Genuineness  and  Date 1 72 

IV.  Heresies  Combated I73 

V.  A  Final  and  Crowning  Revelation 1 76 

VI.  The  Epistle  of  Love I77 

VII.  The  Epistle  of  Knowledge 180 

VIII.  The  Epistle  of  the  Incarnation 184 

IX.  The  Epistle  of  the  Atonement 186 

X.  The  Epistle  of  Personal  Experience 188 

7 


8  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

XI.  The  Epistle  of  Fellowship 189 

XII.  The  Epistle  of  Purity 192 

XIII.  The  Epistle  of  Victory 196 

PART  IV.     THE  MINOR  EPISTLES  OF  JOHN 

I.  General  Character 205 

II.   The  External  Evidence 205 

III.  The  Internal  Evidence 207 

IV.  John  the  Elder 208 

V.  The  Person  Addressed  in  the  Second  Epistle 209 

VI.   Some  Notes  on  the  Second  Epistle 211 

VII.   Notes  on  the  Third  Epistle 214 

VIII.   Value  of  These  Epistles 216 

PART  V.     THE  APOCALYPSE 

I.  Relation  to  the  Other  Johannine  Writings 223 

II.  The  External  Evidence 237 

III.  The  Date 244 

IV.  General  Characteristics  of  the  Apocalyptical  Lit- 

erature    247 

V.   The  Jewish  Apocalypses 252 

VI.  The  Apocalypse  of  John  and  the  Jewish  Apocalypses  257 

VII.   A  Mysterious  Revelation 260 

VIII.  The  Fourfold  Assurance  of  the  Beginning  and  the 

Fearful  Threat  at  the  End 265 

IX.  Two  Reasons  Why  the  Inspiration  of  the  Book  has 

Been  Doubted 268 

X.   Some  Curiosities  of  Exegesis 270 

XI.   Best  General  Attitude  toward  the  Book 276 

XII.   Different  Schools  of  Interpretation 277 

XIII.  Best  System  of  Interpretation 279 

XIV.  General  Characteristics 285 

XV.   Salient  Features  of  Its  Teaching 303 

XVI.   How  to  Read  the  Apocalypse 307 

XVII.  A  Fitting  End  of  the  Bible 310 

Bibliography 3^5 

Indexes 3^9 


FOREWORD 

At  the  close  of  our  volume  on  Paul  and  His  Epistles 
we  said  that  John  was  the  greatest  theologian  of  the 
apostolic  times ;  and,  while  we  recognized  that  the  Pauline 
influence  had  dominated  the  thought  and  life  of  the 
church  at  large,  and  we  believed  that  it  ought  to  do  so 
until  the  missionary  and  evangelistic  work  of  the  church 
was  done,  we  prophesied  that  then  the  Johannine  theologj'' 
would  be  the  supreme  influence  in  the  days  of  the  church's 
edification  and  consummation  in  love.  That  prophecy  indi- 
cates our  estimate  of  the  final  position  to  be  accorded  the 
apostle  John.  We  believe  that  as  the  church  grows  in 
grace  and  becomes  more  and  more  like  its  Lord  it  will  more 
and  more  agree  with  him  that  John  is  the  disciple  most 
worthy  of  its  love. 

There  is  a  disposition  at  the  present  time  with  a  certain 
class  of  writers  to  emphasize  the  dependence  of  John  upon 
Paul,  and  these  writers  try  to  make  it  appear  that  the 
author  of  the  Johannine  books  was  a  disciple  of  Paul  even 
more  fully  than  he  was  a  disciple  of  Jesus.  We  believe 
that  John  always  was  a  receptive  soul  and  that  he  probably 
learned  much  from  Paul,  as  from  every  other  strong  per- 
sonality with  whom  he  came  into  contact,  but  the  supreme 
influence  in  all  his  more  mature  life  was  that  of  the  Master. 
For  the  most  part  he  was  one  of  the  quiet  in  the  land,  and 
he  stood  nearest  to  the  Master,  and  he  saw  deepest  into  the 
Master's  spirit  and  truth,  and  he  meditated  longest  upon 
these  things,  and  in  the  end  he  formulated  more  fully  than 
any  other  the  essentials  of  the  new  faith ;  and  as  far  as  he 
went  we  believe  that  he  has  spoken  the  final  word  in  this 
field. 


10  FOREWORD 

Paul  was  taught  by  the  Spirit,  but  John  had  had  the 
additional  advantage  of  the  three  years  of  teaching  by  the 
Incarnate  Lord.  After  Pentecost  the  Spirit  of  Jesus  led 
him  into  all  the  truth.  His  personal  experience  and  the 
history  of  the  church  taught  him  "new  significance  and 
fresh  result"  from  many  of  his  early  memories  of  the 
Master's  teaching  and  life.  At  last  he  was  prepared  to 
write  the  consummation  of  the  New  Testament  revelation, 
the  final  residuum  of  the  first  century's  experience  in  the 
origin  and  the  development  of  Christian  truth.  After  Peter 
had  been  crucified  and  Paul  had  been  beheaded,  John  was 
left  to  carry  on  the  work  and  to  perfect  the  faith  for  an- 
other entire  generation  in  the  church.  What  Jesus  had 
taught  in  the  first  third  of  the  century  and  what  Peter  and 
Paul  had  preached  in  the  second  third  of  the  century  John 
meditated  upon  through  the  last  third  of  the  century,  and 
in  this  period  he  wrote  the  epistles,  the  Apocalypse,  and 
the  Gospel.  They  represent  the  highest  reach  of  apostolic 
inspiration. 

This  book  will  be  perfect  anathema  in  the  eyes  of  those 
who  are  accustomed  to  treat  the  Johannine  literature  as 
anonymous  or  pseudonymous,  and  to  regard  the  contents 
of  these  books  as  composed  mainly  of  "such  stufif  as  dreams 
are  made  of."  We  believe  that  the  church  tradition  is  vera- 
cious and  trustworthy  which  assigns  the  authorship  of  the 
five  Johannine  books  to  the  apostle  John.  We  believe  that 
the  fourth  Gospel  is  no  romance,  to  be  interpreted  either 
allegorically  or  rationalistically.  We  believe  in  its  historical 
trustworthiness,  and  we  follow  the  apostle  John  as  our 
supreme  authority  both  as  to  fact  and  to  faith. 

There  was  the  old  parallel  of  the  two  pictures  of  Socrates 
given  us  in  the  Memorabilia  of  Xenophon  on  the  one  hand 
and  the  Dialogues  of  Plato  on  the  other,  with  the  two  pic- 
tures of  Jesus  furnished  us  by  the  synoptic  Gospels  on 
the  one  hand  and  the  fourth  Gospel  on  the  other.  It  used 
to  be  a  commonplace  of  criticism  to  affirm  that  the  former 


FOREWORD  II 

picture  in  the  two  cases  was  the  prosaic,  historical,  and 
reliable  one,  while  the  latter  was  poetical,  idealistic,  and 
imaginative.  It  is  interesting  to  see  that  there  is  a  tendency 
at  present  among  the  classical  scholars  to  revise  that 
opinion  and  to  believe  that  Plato,  after  all,  has  given  us 
the  truer  picture  of  the  great  master;  and  we  confidently 
expect  that  the  final  judgment  in  the  case  of  the  Gospels 
will  be  favorable  to  the  greater  value  of  that  presentation 
of  the  Master's  life  and  teaching  which  belongs  to  the  one 
who  loved  him  most  and  served  him  longest  upon  the  earth. 

As  his  Gospel  is  better  than  any  one  of  the  synoptics,  so 
we  regard  his  first  epistle  as  better  than  any  one  of  the 
epistles  of  Paul.  The  difference  in  their  writings  marks 
the  difference  in  the  men.  Paul  is  the  greatest  of  the 
scribes,  learned  in  the  law ;  John  is  the  greatest  of  the  seers, 
learned  in  love.  Paul  deals  with  syllogisms ;  John  deals 
with  intuitions.  Paul  argues  and  convinces ;  John  sees  and 
declares.  Paul  is  an  advocate;  John  is  a  prophet.  Paul 
proves  with  inevitable  logic ;  John  proclaims  with  irrefuta- 
ble insight.  Paul's  proofs  press  upon  each  other  like  waves 
dashing  over  fortifications  of  sand  on  the  beach.  John's 
thought  moves  calmly  and  majestically  like  the  ripples 
which  spread  outward  in  ever-widening  circles  till  they  are 
lost  to  sight,  when  you  drop  a  pebble  into  the  dimpling 
surface  of  the  sleeping  lake. 

Paul's  epistles  are  treatises,  arguing  from  premises  to 
conclusions  in  logical  order  and  formal  structure.  John's 
epistles  are  serenely  unconscious  of  system  and  superior 
to  formal  argument.  John  makes  confident  affirmation  of 
truth  which  he  is  sure  will  be  self -attesting.  He  only  has 
to  utter  it  and  let  it  stand.  His  sentences  are  like  the 
Sequoia  of  the  Pacific  Coast,  every  one  a  giant  which 
stands  alone.  Great  spiritual  intuitions  are  expressed  with 
uttermost  simplicity  in  giant  sublimity  of  strength.  The 
genius  of  John  is  most  in  evidence  in  the  ease  with  which 
he  unites  the  historical  with  the  ideal,  grasps  the  meaning 


12  FOREWORD 

of  all  phenomena,  and  sees  the  ultimate  truth  behind  the 
surface  event  in  the  Apocalypse,  the  epistle,  and  the  Gospel. 

Paul  wrote  thirteen  of  the  New  Testament  books;  John 
wrote  only  five.  Paul  confined  himself  to  the  writing  of 
epistles ;  John  in  his  five  books  has  given  us  three  distinct 
types  of  literature.  Our  New  Testament  divides  into  his- 
torical, epistolary,  and  apocalyptical  books ;  and  in  each  of 
the  two  former  divisions  John  represents  the  highest  type, 
while  in  the  latter  he  furnishes  the  only  example.  Each 
of  these  writings  seems  well-nigh  perfect  in  its  kind,  and 
yet  they  all  supplement  and  complement  each  other  most 
wonderfully. 

In  the  Gospel,  John  shows  us  Jesus  in  the  flesh,  in  the 
epistles  he  pictures  Christ  in  the  heart,  and  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse he  reveals  Jesus  the  Christ  as  the  Lord  of  heaven. 
In  the  Gospel  we  find  the  historical  Jesus,  in  the  epistles 
the  Jesus  of  Christian  experience,  and  in  the  Apocalypse 
Jesus  the  Lord  of  all  and  the  King  of  glory.  In  the  Gospel 
we  have  the  fundamentals  of  the  Christian's  faith,  in  the 
epistles  the  fundamentals  of  the  Christian's  life  and  love, 
while  in  the  Apocalypse  we  find  the  foundation  of  the 
Christian's  undying  hope.  In  the  Gospel  John  is  a  his- 
torian, in  the  epistles  a  pastor,  in  the  Apocalypse  a  seer — 
and  in  all  his  writings  a  Christian  prophet  and  theologian 
beyond  compare.  Others  may  have  been  dominant  in  the 
past.  Others  may  rule  in  the  present.  The  future  belongs 
to  John.     He  increasingly  will  come  to  his  own. 


PART  I 
THE  APOSTLE  JOHN 


PART  I 
THE  APOSTLE  JOHN 

I.    John  the  Little  Known 

We  know  very  little  about  the  apostle  John.  To  most 
people  it  is  a  matter  of  surprise  to  discover  how  meager 
our  information  is  concerning  so  important  a  member  of 
the  apostolic  band. 

Ask  the  average  New  Testament  student  whether  we 
know  much  about  the  apostle  John,  and  in  all  probability 
he  will  reply:  "O,  yes,  the  pages  of  the  Gospels  are  full 
of  information  concerning  him.  He  wrote  five  of  the  books 
of  our  New  Testament,  almost  a  fifth  of  the  whole  number 
and  filling  about  one  fifth  of  the  volume  in  space."  Then 
we  turn  to  the  Gospels  and  we  find  to  our  surprise  that 
John's  name  occurs  in  them  only  twenty  times  in  all,  and 
that  in  more  than  half  of  these  occurrences  there  is  the 
mere  mention  of  the  name  and  little  or  no  information  is 
given  us  concerning  the  man. 

Ask  the  average  student  of  the  New  Testament  whether 
we  know  more  about  John  the  Baptist  or  John  the  apostle, 
and  in  all  probability  he  will  reply:  "We  know  very  little 
about  John  the  Baptist,  except  that  he  was  the  forerunner  of 
Jesus  and  that  he  was  beheaded  early  in  the  Lord's  minis- 
try; but  John  the  apostle  was  one  of  the  first  disciples  of 
Jesus,  and  became  his  most  intimate  friend  through  all  his 
ministry,  and  then  outlived  all  the  other  apostles.  He  had 
a  long  and  most  influential  career,  and  we  know  much 
more  about  him  than  we  do  about  John  the  Baptist." 

Then  we  turn  to  the  Gospels  to  find  if  this  is  true,  and 
we  discover  that  in  the  Gospel  according  to  Matthew,  John 

15 


i6  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

the  Baptist  is  mentioned  twenty-three  times  and  John  the 
Apostle  only  three  times.  In  each  of  these  three  times 
Matthew  mentions  John  simply  as  the  brother  of  James, 
and  he  tells  us  seven  times  as  much  about  John  the  Baptist 
as  he  does  about  the  brother  of  James.  In  the  Gospel 
according  to  Mark,  John  the  Baptist  is  mentioned  sixteen 
times  and  John  the  apostle  only  ten  times.  In  the  Gospel 
according  to  Luke  the  Baptist  is  mentioned  twenty- 
four  times  and  the  apostle  only  seven  times.  In  the  fourth 
Gospel  John  the  Baptist  is  mentioned  twenty  times  and 
the  name  of  John  the  apostle  is  not  found  in  the  book  from 
beginning  to  end. 

Even  when  we  pass  over  into  the  Book  of  the  Acts, 
written  about  events  occurring  long  years  after  the  death 
of  John  the  Baptist  and  while  John  the  apostle  was  still 
living  and  active  in  the  building  up  of  the  church,  and  in 
which,  therefore,  we  might  expect  John  the  Baptist  to, 
fall  entirely  out  of  notice  while  John  the  apostle  would 
become  prominent  and  predominant  in  the  affairs  recorded, 
we  find  to  our  surprise  that  John  the  Baptist  is  mentioned 
by  name  nine  times  in  the  book  and  John  the  apostle  only 
the  same  number  of  times.  It  would  seem,  then,  that  in  the 
minds  of  the  writers  of  the  historical  books  of  our  New 
Testament  John  the  Baptist  was  a  far  more  important 
personality  than  the  apostle  John.  The  Gospels  mention 
the  Baptist  more  than  four  times  as  often  as  they  men- 
tion the  apostle;  and  if  we  include  the  Book  of  Acts  we 
find  that  all  the  historical  books  of  the  New  Testament 
make  John  the  Baptist  more  than  three  times  as  prominent 
as  the  apostle  John. 

We  know  much  more  about  Peter  and  we  know  much 
more  about  Paul  than  we  know  about  John.  Peter  and 
Paul  are  great  talkers,  both  of  them;  and  they  are  both 
capable  of  considerable  self-advertisement  upon  occasion. 
They  tell  us  a  great  deal  about  themselves.  They  could 
have  written  very  readable  and  interesting  autobiographies. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  t^ 

and  both  of  them  would  have  thoroughly  enjoyed  the  task. 
John  would  not  have  enjoyed  it.  He  w^as  a  man  of  another 
type.  He  talked  little  about  anything  and  not  at  all  about 
himself.  H  anybody  else  were  present  to  do  the  talking, 
he  kept  still.  He  liked  to  associate  with  Peter  for  that 
reason,  as  well  as  for  other  things.  Peter  was  perfectly 
willing  to  keep  the  conversation  going  at  any  length  and 
at  any  time.  H  anything  needed  to  be  said  on  any  occasion 
when  Peter  was  present,  he  always  felt  sure  that  he  was 
the  providentially  designated  individual  to  say  it,  and  John 
always  was  ready  to  allow  Peter  to  assume  all  responsibility 
along  that  line.  Peter  was  garrulous  to  the  limit;  John 
was  reticent  to  a  fault. 

If  Peter's  wife's  mother  lay  sick  with  a  fever  and  you 
called  at  his  home,  Peter  would  tell  you  all  about  it,  all 
the  preliminary  symptoms  and  all  the  progress  of  the 
disease,  all  the  remedies  which  had  been  tried  and  all  which 
the  neighbors  had  suggested,  all  that  the  doctor  had  said 
about  the  case  and  all  that  Peter  himself  thought  about  it. 
He  would  take  it  for  granted  that  you  were  as  concerned 
in  his  mother-in-law  as  he  himself  was,  and  that  the  thing 
which  was  uppermost  in  his  interest  at  that  moment  would 
be  equally  interesting  to  you ;  and  people  always  liked 
Peter,  and  they  usually  enjoyed  hearing  him  talk.  On  the 
other  hand,  if  John's  mother,  Salome,  lay  sick  with  a  fever 
and  you  knew  nothing  about  it  when  you  called  at  their 
home,  John  would  receive  you  and  talk  with  you  about 
other  matters  and  allow  you  to  make  your  call  and  go 
away  again  without  saying  a  word  to  you  about  his  mother's 
illness;  and  when  you  heard  of  it  through  the  neighbors 
afterward  you  would  be  likely  to  think  that  John  was  a 
queer  fellow  and  unduly  close-mouthed,  and  that  he  had 
been  a  little  less  than  cordial  in  not  telling  you,  an  old 
friend  of  the  family,  something  at  least  about  it. 

That  was  the  sort  of  man  John  was.  We  learn  from  the 
other  evangelists  that  his  mother  Salome  was  one  of  the 


i8  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

women  who  accompanied  Jesus  in  his  itinerant  ministry 
and  that  as  he  ministered  to  others  she  ministered  to  him 
and  his  followers  from  her  own  substance.  The  other 
evangelists  tell  us  that  she  was  present  at  the  crucifixion 
and  again  at  the  resurrection;  and  we  learn  from  their 
narratives  that  she  was  one  of  the  most  faithful  and 
devoted  among  the  women  disciples  of  Jesus.  John  writes 
a  whole  Gospel,  setting  forth  the  life  of  our  Lord,  and  he 
never  once  mentions  Salome's  name.  That  is  characteristic 
of  him.  He  will  not  talk  about  himself  or  his  family. 
After  the  crucifixion  Mary  the  mother  of  Jesus  became  a 
member  of  the  family  of  John  and  probably  for  that  reason 
her  name  never  is  mentioned  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  Mark 
mentions  her  name  once  and  Matthew  five  times  and  Luke 
thirteen  times,  but  in  the  fourth  Gospel  she  is  called  "his 
mother"  and  once  only  "the  mother  of  Jesus,"  but  her  name 
is  not  found  in  the  narrative  from  beginning  to  end.  John 
makes  her  share  in  the  anonymity  of  his  entire  family. 

Suppose  we  had  gone  to  the  apostle  Paul  and  told  him 
that  some  of  his  enemies  had  called  him  a  liar,  what  would 
Paul  have  answered  us?  In  all  probability  he  would  have 
said:  "They  say  that  I  am  a  weakling  and  a  liar,  do  they? 
Well,  who  are  they?  I  appeal  to  my  record  and  my  repu- 
tation and  I  challenge  comparison  with  theirs."  "Are  they 
Hebrews  ?  So  am  I.  Are  they  Israelites  ?  So  am  I.  Are 
they  the  seed  of  Abraham?  So  am  I.  Are  they  ministers 
of  Christ?  (I  speak  as  one  beside  himself)  I  more;  in 
labors  more  abundantly,  in  prisons  more  abundantly,  in 
stripes  above  measure,  in  deaths  oft.  Of  the  Jews  five 
times  received  I  forty  stripes  save  one.  Thrice  was  I 
beaten  with  rods,  once  was  I  stoned,  thrice  I  suiifered  ship- 
wreck, a  night  and  a  day  have  I  been  in  the  deep ;  in  jour- 
neyings  often,  in  perils  of  rivers,  in  perils  of  robbers,  in 
perils  from  my  countrymen,  in  perils  from  the  Gentiles,  in 
perils  in  the  city,  in  perils  in  the  wilderness,  in  perils  in  the 
sea,  in  perils  among  false  brethren;  in  labor  and  travail, 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  19 

in  watchings  often,  in  hunger  and  thirst,  in  fastings  often, 
in  cold  and  nakedness.  Beside  those  things  that  are  with- 
out, there  is  that  which  presseth  upon  me  daily,  anxiety  for 
all  the  churches.  Who  is  weak,  and  I  am  not  weak?  who 
is  caused  to  stumble,  and  I  burn  not?  If  I  must  needs 
glory,  I  will  glory  of  the  things  that  concern  my  weakness. 
The  God  and  Father  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  he  who  is  blessed 
forevermore,  knoweth  that  I  lie  not."^  We  are  almost 
glad  that  somebody  called  the  apostle  Paul  a  liar,  for  in 
answer  he  has  poured  forth  a  whole  paragraph  of  auto- 
biography, giving  many  facts  of  which  we  would  have  had 
no  knowledge  if  it  had  not  been  for  this  provocation. 

Now  suppose  we  go  to  the  apostle  John  and  tell  him 
that  his  enemies  declare  that  he  is  a  liar  and  that  his  Gospel 
is  not  the  gospel  of  truth.  What  will  we  hear  in  answer? 
Will  he  pour  forth  a  torrent  of  self -vindication  in  para- 
graph after  paragraph  of  autobiography?  No,  that  would 
not  be  characteristic  of  John.  He  will  not  condescend  to 
defend  himself.  He  will  not  even  condescend  to  defend 
the  truth.  He  simply  will  state  it  again  and  call  it  the 
truth  and  assert  that  such  it  self-evidently  is;  and  he  will 
remark  quietly  that  those  enemies  we  have  been  quoting 
to  him  are  children  of  the  devil  and  Antichrists  and  liars 
themselves.  In  characterizing  them  he  may  be  more  out- 
spoken than  the  apostle  Paul ;  but  he  will  say  never  a  word 
about  himself. 

Probably  he  would  say  something  like  this,  "I  have  not 
written  unto  you  because  ye  know  not  the  truth,  but  be- 
cause ye  know  it,  and  because  no  lie  is  of  the  truth.  Who 
is  the  liar,  but  he  that  denieth  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ? 
This  is  the  antichrist,  even  he  who  denieth  the  Father 
and  the  Son.2  In  this  the  children  of  God  are  manifest, 
and  the  children  of  the  devil:  whosoever  doeth  not  right- 
eousness  is  not  of   God,  neither  he  that  loveth  not  his 

1  See  2  Cor.  11.  22-31. 
*  I  John  2.  21,  22. 


20  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

brother."^  The  only  satisfaction  we  would  get  from  tell- 
ing John  that  his  enemies  declared  that  his  Gospel  was  a 
lie  would  be  the  hearing  of  the  repetition  of  his  gospel 
truth.  We  would  hear  nothing  about  himself.  On  that 
subject  his  lips  would  be  tightly  sealed. 

John  has  written  five  books  of  our  New  Testament,  but 
in  those  five  books  his  own  name  occurs  only  five  times ; 
and  all  of  these  occurrences  of  his  name  are  in  the  book 
of  Revelation,  and  they  tell  us  very  little  about  the  man 
beyond  the  fact  that  the  visions  there  recorded  were 
granted  to  him.  Here,  then,  is  one  good  reason  why  we 
know  so  little  about  the  apostle  John.  Though  he  had 
abundant  opportunity  to  tell  us  about  himself,  he  absolutely 
refuses  to  do  it.  He  is  as  reticent  in  all  matters  of  auto- 
biographical detail  as  was  the  Master  himself.  Like  the 
Master,  he  belonged  to  the  quiet  in  the  land.  He  never 
sounded  his  own  trumpet.  His  voice  was  not  heard  in  the 
streets. 

However,  though  the  Master  never  wrote  anything  about 
himself,  we  know  very  much  about  him,  because  others 
thought  it  worth  while  to  preserve  a  record  of  his  doings 
and  sayings.  Why  do  not  the  other  Gospel  writers  tell  us 
more  about  the  apostle  John  ?  It  would  be  safe  to  say  that 
the  New  Testament  tells  us  five  times  as  much  about  Peter 
as  it  does  about  John.  Why  is  this?  Because  all  of  the 
New  Testament  writers  liked  Peter  v^ith  all  of  his  faults. 
The  Gospel  according  to  Mark  was  written  by  one  who 
was  Peter's  constant  companion  and  friend  in  much  of  his 
ministry  and  one  who  looked  upon  Peter  as  his  spiritual 
father  in  the  gospel.  We  naturally  would  expect  a  Gospel 
narrative  written  by  such  a  man  to  make  Peter  especially 
prominent.  We  find  the  same  prominence  given  to  Peter 
in  the  other  synoptic  Gospels  and  in  the  book  of  Acts ;  and 
Peter   is    mentioned   oftener   in   the    fourth   Gospel   than 

'  I  John  3.  10. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  21 

John  is  mentioned  in  the  four  Gospels  put  together.  The 
fact  of  the  case  is  that  Mark  and  Matthew  and  Luke  and 
John  all  admired  and  loved  the  impetuous  and  faulty  but 
loyal-hearted  Peter,  while  neither  Matthew  nor  Mark  nor 
Luke  admired  or  loved  John  in  the  same  degree. 

It  would  be  safe  to  say  that  in  the  book  of  Acts  Paul's 
name  is  mentioned  ten  times  as  often  as  the  name  of  John, 
and  the  reason  is  not  far  to  seek.  The  book  of  Acts  was 
written  by  a  man  who  was  the  constant  companion  and 
close  friend  of  the  apostle  Paul  for  many  years,  and  to 
him  Paul  was  the  greatest  hero  in  the  early  history  of  the 
church.  He  admired  and  loved  Paul  with  a  singular  devo- 
tion ;  he  did  not  admire  or  love  John  in  anything  like  the 
same  degree.  It  never  occurred  to  Luke  that  John  ever 
was  or  would  be  of  such  service  to  the  Christian  Church 
as  Paul  had  been  and  would  be.  Luke  did  not  care  par- 
ticularly for  the  apostle  John ;  and  he  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  a  favorite  with  any  of  the  other  writers  of  the 
New  Testament  historical  books. 

Peter  liked  John.  Peter  could  get  along  with  anybody, 
and  he  liked  everybody.  If  he  had  written  a  Gospel  with 
his  own  hand,  I  think  John  would  have  played  a  more 
important  part  in  it  than  in  any  of  the  Gospels  we  have. 
Then,  too,  John  was  a  favorite  with  Jesus.  If  the  Master 
had  written  a  Gospel,  John  would  have  occupied  a  larger 
place  in  it  than  any  other  of  the  apostolic  band.  A  Gospel 
written  by  Jesus  would  have  concerned  itself  more  with 
spiritual  affinities  and  less  with  external  incidents  or  spec- 
tacular occurrences  than  our  Gospels  do.  In  such  a  Gospel 
Peter  would  have  had  less  room  and  John  would  have  come 
to  the  front  and  have  occupied  his  rightful  place  close  to 
the  Master's  side.  Here,  then,  is  a  second  reason  why  we 
are  told  so  little  about  the  apostle  John  in  our  New  Testa- 
ment books.  The  writers  of  those  books  either  did  not 
appreciate  him  at  his  true  worth  or  they  cherished  an  active 
feeling  of  dislike  for  him  in  their  hearts. 


22  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

II.    John  the  Unrecorded  and  Disregarded 

It  has  been  said  that  the  synoptic  writers  never  mention 
John  specifically  except  to  find  fault  with  him.  It  is  true 
that  the  only  time  John  is  mentioned  alone  in  the  synoptic 
Gospels  is  when  we  are  told  that  he  reported  to  Jesus  that 
he  had  forbidden  a  man  to  cast  out  devils  in  the  Master's 
name  because  the  man  did  not  follow  them,  and  Jesus 
rebuked  his  spirit  of  intolerance  and  told  him  he  had  made 
a  mistake  and  that  henceforth  he  never  should  forbid  any- 
one who  was  doing  good  whether  he  trained  in  their  camp 
or  not.^  It  is  also  true  that  the  only  times  the  two  brothers, 
James  and  John,  are  mentioned  alone  are  when  we  read 
that  they  wanted  to  call  down  fire  upon  the  village  of  the 
Samaritans  because  they  were  inhospitable  to  Jesus,  and 
Jesus  turned  upon  them  and  rebuked  them,^  and  that  other 
time  when  they  came  with  their  mother  to  ask  for  the 
chief  seats  in  the  Kingdom  and  the  rest  of  the  apostles 
were  moved  with  reasonable  and  righteous  indignation  at 
their  selfish  attempt.**  The  Master  rebuked  their  desire 
for  lordship  and  refused  their  request  and  told  them  they 
did  not  know  what  they  asked.  These  three  rebukes  for 
the  spirit  of  selfishness  and  the  spirit  of  revenge  and  the 
spirit  of  intolerance  are  all  that  the  synoptics  have  seen 
fit  to  record  of  the  apostle  John  and  his  individual  relation- 
ship to  the  Lord. 

They  mention  the  fact  that  Peter  and  John  were  sent 
together  to  prepare  for  the  passover  meal.'^  They  tell  us 
that  Peter,  James,  and  John  were  present  with  the  Lord 
on  three  occasions  when  the  remainder  of  the  apostolic 
band  were  not  admitted  to  the  same  intimacy:  at  the  rais- 
ing of  the  daughter  of  Jairus,*  at  the  transfiguration,^  and 
in  the  garden  of  Gethsemane.^^     They  record  the  call  to 

*  Mark  9.  38;  Luke  9.  49.  *  Mark  5.  37. 

*  Luke  9.  52-55.  9  Mark  9.  2. 

8  Mark  10.  35-41 ;  Matt.  20.  20-24.  "  Mark  14.  33. 

'  Luke  22.  1 8, 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  23 

continuous  ministry  of  the  two  pairs  of  brothers,  Peter 
and  Andrew  with  James  and  John.^i  Mark  tells  us  that 
these  four  had  private  conversation  with  the  Master  con- 
cerning the  last  things. ^2 

In  the  four  lists  of  the  apostles  given  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment the  name  of  John  is  mentioned,  and  always  among 
the  first  four  though  usually  the  last  of  the  four — Peter 
and  Andrew  and  James  and  John.^^  j^is  is  all  the  synop- 
tic Gospels  have  to  tell  us  about  John.  They  mention  him 
usually  only  in  groups  of  the  apostles,  and  then  always  in 
a  subordinate  position  as  the  brother  of  James  or  the  com- 
panion of  Peter,  or  of  James,  or  of  Peter  and  James ;  and 
whenever  he  is  isolated  from  the  apostolic  group  it  is  to 
show  him  ignorant  and  mistaken  and  deserving  and  receiv- 
ing the  Master's  rebuke.  It  does  seem  that  in  these  writers 
there  was  some  personal  animus  against  the  apostle  John 
which  led  them  either  to  ignore  him  as  much  as  possible 
in  their  narratives  or  to  record  only  those  incidents  in 
which  he  had  been  found  worthy  of  blame. 

If  we  turn  to  the  fourth  Gospel  for  added  information 
concerning  John,  we  find  that  his  name  is  not  mentioned 
in  the  book  from  beginning  to  end.  That  name  simply 
drops  out  of  the  narrative,  and  whether  for  praise  or  blame 
the  personality  of  the  apostle  John  is  concealed  as  far  as 
the  facts  will  allow.  We  are  told  that  the  sons  of  Zebedee 
went  fishing  with  Peter  on  the  sea  of  Tiberias  and  were 
in  the  group  to  whom  the  risen  Lord  appeared,^^  but  that 
is  the  nearest  approach  in  the  whole  Gospel  to  any  definite 
identification  of  the  apostle  John  with  the  events  narrated. 
Peter  is  just  as  prominent  in  this  Gospel  as  in  any  other. 
We  have  long  conversations  of  Jesus  with  Nathanael  and 
Nicodemus  and  the  Samaritan  woman  and  Andrew  and 


"  Mark  i.  19,  20;  Matt.  4.  21,  22;  Luke  5.  8-11. 

12  Mark  13.  3-5. 

"  Mark  3.  16-19;  Matt.  10.  2-4;  Luke  6.  14-16;  Acts  i.  13. 

"John  21.  2. 


24  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Philip  and  Judas  not  Iscariot.  The  Lord  seems  to  have 
talked  freely  with  these  individuals  and  with  the  group  of 
the  disciples  and  with  the  multiiudes  again  and  again;  but 
as  far  as  this  narrative  is  concerned  he  might  seem  never 
to  have  had  a  word  with  the  apostle  John  alone.  No  con- 
versation between  these  two  is  recorded  in  this  book. 

There  are  three  short  sentences  in  the  fourth  Gospel 
which  may  have  been  spoken  by  John.  If  we  decide  that 
he  was  the  unnamed  disciple  who  with  Andrew  first  left 
John  the  Baptist  to  follow  after  Jesus,  he  may  have  been 
the  one  who  asked  Jesus,  "Rabbi,  .  .  .  where  abidest 
thou?"^^  It  would  seem  more  probable,  however,  that 
Andrew  was  the  spokesman  on  this  occasion  and  that  John 
was  silent,  as  usual,  and  allowed  his  companion  to  speak 
for  both.  If  we  identify  John  as  that  disciple  who  re- 
clined at  the  table  during  the  Last  Supper  in  the  position 
nearest  the  Lord,  then  he  was  the  one  who  asked  concern- 
ing the  betrayer,  "Lord,  who  is  it?"^^  However,  we  read 
that  that  question  was  put  into  his  mouth  by  Peter  and 
really  belonged  to  Peter  himself.  If  we  conclude  that  John 
was  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved,  mentioned  four  times 
in  this  Gospel  and  nowhere  else  in  the  New  Testament, 
then  he  was  the  one  who  said  to  Peter  when  that  stranger 
called  to  them  from  the  shore  of  the  sea  of  Tiberias,  "It 
is  the  Lord."^'^ 

These  three  short  sentences  are  the  only  ones  we  can 
assign  to  the  apostle  John  with  any  probability;  and  of  the 
three  only  the  last  would  seem  to  be  his  own  in  any  true 
sense  or  with  any  degree  of  certainty.  It  consists  of  three 
short  words  in  the  Greek,  'O  KVQLog  koriv,  but  those  three 
words  summarize  the  aim  of  the  entire  Gospel  and  express 
the  whole  endeavor  of  John's  writing  and  life — to  point 


"John  I.  38. 
"  John  13.  25. 
"John  21.  7. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  25 

out,  to  call  attention  to,  and  to  identify  Jesus  as  Lord.  At 
the  beginning  of  the  Gospel  stands  John  the  Baptist  saying, 
"Behold,  the  Lamb  of  God !"  and  at  the  close  of  the  Gospel 
stands  the  apostle  John  saying,  "It  is  the  Lord."  That  is  all  u^ 
John  says  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  It  is~the  whole  of  his 
gospel  message  to  men.  Peter  talks  much  in  this  Gospel, 
as  in  all  of  the  others,  and  many  more  of  the  disciples  say 
many  things.  John  says  only  three  words ;  and  this  fourth 
Gospel  represents  him  as  the  same  quiet,  silent,  listening, 
unobtrusive,  and  seemingly  subordinate  and  unimportant 
individual  the  synoptics  had  pictured  for  us. 

Nevertheless,  it  tells  us  one  new  thing  about  him  which 
we  never  might  have  suspected  from  their  narratives.   We 
gathered  from  them  that  the  other  evangelists  did  not  like 
John  very  well.     We  learn  from  the  fourth  Gospel  that    . 
Jesus  loved  him  more  than  he  loved  any  other  man.    That 
fact  in  itself  discloses  more  concerning  John's  inner  charac-  C 
ter  than  the  record  of  many  sayings  and  incidents  might  ( 
have  done.  ■' 

In  the  book  of  Acts  the  name  of  John  appears  in  con- 
nection with  two  narratives  only.  We  are  told  that  he  was 
with  Peter  at  the  gate  of  the  temple  when  the  lame  man 
was  healed,  and  afterward  was  brought  with  Peter  before 
the  Sanhedrin,^^  but  here,  as  always,  Peter  is  the  spokes- 
man and  the  prominent  character  and  John  is  associated 
with  him  as  a  silent  and  sympathetic  companion.  In  the 
eighth  chapter  we  are  told  how  Peter  and  John  went  down 
into  Samaria  to  take  care  of  the  converts  resulting  from 
Philip's  evangelistic  campaign, ^^  and  John  must  have  taken 
his  share  in  the  preaching  and  the  ministry  of  those  days ; 
but  all  of  the  recorded  talking  is  done  by  Peter,  and  John 
seems  simply  to  have  stood  by  and  to  have  assisted  as  need 
required.  The  prominent  figures  in  the  book  of  Acts  are 
Peter  and  Paul,  Stephen  and  Philip,  Barnabas,  Silas,  and 

"  Acts  3.  I  to  4.  22. 
"  Acts  8.  14-25. 


26  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Timothy,  James  the  brother  of  Jesus,  Apollos,  Aquila,  and 
Priscilla.  John  seems  to  be  of  secondary  importance  still. 
Once  again  the  name  of  John  is  mentioned.  In  the 
Epistle  to  the  Galatians  Paul  says  that  James  and  Cephas 
and  John  were  reputed  to  be  pillars  of  the  church  at  Jeru- 
salem when  Barnabas  and  he  visited  thereto  Then  John 
drops  out  of  notice  in  the  New  Testament  until  we  come 
to  the  book  of  Revelation,  where  his  name  occurs  five 
times  as  the  seer  and  the  writer  of  the  visions  there  re- 
corded. 

III.     John  in  the  New  Testament 

We  now  have  outlined  all  the  sources  of  information 
concerning  the  life  of  the  apostle  John,  and  we  have  seen 
how  surprisingly  meager  is  the  information  which  these 
sources  furnish  us.  Upon  the  basis  of  the  few  facts  they 
supply  we  will  attempt  to  construct  his  biography.  We 
do  not  know  where  or  when  he  was  born.  Possibly 
his  birthplace  was  Bethsaida.  We  know  that  Philip  was 
from  Bethsaida  and  that  this  was  the  city  of  Peter  and 
Andrew. 21  We  know  that  James  and  John  were  associated 
with  Peter  and  Andrew  in  the  fishing  business  at  the  time 
of  their  call  to  the  discipleship  with  Jesus. 22  It  would  be 
natural  to  suppose  that  business  partners  would  be  fellow 
townsmen.  If  so,  then  five  of  our  Lord's  apostles — and 
the  five  always  mentioned  first  in  our  New  Testament  lists 
of  the  apostles — were  from  the  same  provincial  town. 

Not  one  of  the  apostles  was  called  from  the  city  of  Jeru- 
salem. All  of  the  first  preachers  of  the  gospel  were  country 
bred.  The  Lord  seemed  to  consider  that  the  best  arrange- 
ment in  the  beginning,  and  the  Lord  seems  to  consider  that 
the  best  arrangement  to-day.  The  country  still  furnishes 
us  our  preachers.    It  is  notorious  that  city  churches  are  for 


2"  Gal.  2.  9. 
2»  John  I.  44. 
^^  Luke  5.  10, 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  27 

the  most  part  ministerially  barren ;  but  that  is  nothing  new 
in  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church.  City  pulpits  always 
have  been  filled  with  country  lads.  The  country  has  sup- 
plied the  city  with  religious  as  well  as  other  leadership.  All 
indications  would  seem  to  point  to  either  Bethsaida  or 
Capernaum  as  the  probable  birthplace  and  home  of  the 
apostle  John,  and  of  these  two  Bethsaida  seems  the  more 
likely. 

The  name  "Jo^"/'  'Iwdv?/?-,  is  Greek  and  represents  the 
Hebrew,  lj'7'^'^?  Jehochanan,  or  IJ'^'i"'  Jochanan,  which 
means,  "J^^^^ah  is  gracious."  It  has  a  modern  equivalent 
in  the  German  name,  Gotthold. 

We  know  the  names  of  four  members  of  the  family. 
James  probably  was  an  older  brother,  since  his  name 
usually  precedes  that  of  John  when  the  two  are  mentioned 
together.  The  father's  name  was  Zebedee  and  the  mother's 
name  was  Salome.  The  family  probably  was  well  to  do. 
We  think  this  for  several  reasons:  i.  They  had  hired  serv- 
ants.^^  They  belonged  to  the  employer  class,  and  that  must 
have  meant  that  they  had  an  assured  income  and  some 
capital.  2.  Salome  was  one  of  the  women  who  ministered 
unto  Jesus  of  their  substance.^^  That  must  have  meant  that 
she  had  money  to  give  away,  means  sufficient  to  permit 
her  to  be  benevolent  and  to  help  to  provide  the  necessities 
for  the  apostolic  band.  3.  She  was  one  of  the  women  who 
bought  spices  and  came  to  anoint  Jesus  in  the  tomb.^s  Her 
purse  was  still  open ;  her  means  had  not  been  exhausted 
by  all  her  previous  giving. 

4.  It  may  be  that  John  was  known  to  the  high  priest 
and  had  the  right  of  entrance  into  the  high  priest's  court 
and  was  able  to  bring  Peter  in  to  see  the  trial  of  Jesus 
there.2°  If  John  was  the  "other  disciple"  mentioned  in  this 
connection,  this  personal  acquaintance  with  the  high  priest 
and  his  household  may  be  an  indication  of  a  higher  social 

23  Mark  i.  20.  25  Mark  16.  i. 

"  Luke  8.  3;  Mark  15.  41.  '^^  John  18.  15,  16. 


28  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

rank  than  that  of  the  other  apostles.  Such  acquaintance- 
ship is  more  possible  at  least  to  the  prosperous  middle  class 
than  to  the  very  poor.  5.  At  the  cross  Jesus  gave  his 
mother  into  John's  keeping,  and  we  read  that  John  took 
her  unto  his  own  home.^^  If  the  statement  that  John  took 
Mary  unto  his  own  home  "from  that  hour"  is  to  be  inter- 
preted literally,  it  must  mean  that  John  had  a  home  in  Jeru- 
salem at  this  time.  A  Galilaean  fisherman  could  not  have 
left  his  business  for  some  years  and  then  have  acquired 
property  in  Jerusalem  unless  he  had  some  independent 
fortune  to  draw  upon. 

To  these  five  indications  of  some  superior  standing  and 
wealth  we  possibly  may  add,  as  a  sixth,  the  request  which 
Salome  made  for  her  sons  that  they  might  sit,  one  on  the 
right  hand  and  one  on  the  left  hand,  in  the  Lord's  king- 
dom. ^^  Why  should  she  suggest  that  any  preeminence  be 
^  granted  to  them?  They  do  not  appear  to  have  been  pre- 
eminent in  influence  or  in  service,  according  to  the  narra- 
tives in  our  Gospels.  What  right  had  she  or  they  to  set 
up  any  claim  to  preeminent  honor  in  the  days  of  the  coming 
triumph  of  the  Messiah-King?  Could  it  be  that  they  re- 
garded themselves  as  belonging  to  the  aristocracy  among 
the  disciples  of  the  Lord?  Did  they  consider  themselves 
of  a  superior  social  rank,  sufficient  to  guarantee  their  right 
to  lord  it  over  the  rest  a  little,  or  at  least  to  exercise  au- 
thority over  them  for  their  good  ?  Was  it  possible  that  they 
had  put  more  money  into  the  enterprise  than  any  other 
family  had,  and  on  the  basis  of  their  financial  flotation  they 
felt  they  had  first  claim  on  the  honors  and  rewards  of  the 
Messianic  kingdom? 

Their  love  for  the  Master  may  have  been  just  as  sincere 
and  their  loyalty  to  the  Lord  and  to  his  program  may  have 
been  unwavering  throughout,  and  yet  this  feeling  may  have 
been  cherished  at  the  same  time,  that  money  and  social 

""  John  19.  27. 
28  Matt.  20.  20, 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  29 

standing  ought  to  be  recognized  in  the  distribution  of  the 
prizes  in  the  end.  Had  not  the  Lord  said,  "Whosoever 
hath,  to  him  shall  be  given"  P^^  Jesus  had  to  make  it 
perfectly  clear  at  this  time  that  the  only  preeminence 
granted  in  his  Kingdom  was  granted  not  to  preeminent 
wealth  nor  social  rank,  but  only  to  preeminent  ministry  in 
service  and  sacrifice. 

Now,  if  this  were  true,  that  Salome  and  James  and  John 
had  cherished  a  feeling  of  family  superiority  and  exclu- 
siveness,  it  would  go  far  to  explain  that  feeling  of  personal 
dislike  for  them  which  we  more  than  half  suspected  the 
other  disciples  to  have,  and  in  itself  it  would  be  a  sufficient 
reason  for  the  indignation  concerning  the  two  brethren 
which  moved  the  ten  at  this  time,  while  it  would  furnish 
one  possible  and  plausible  ground  for  the  conceiving  and 
preferring  of  such  a  request  by  Salome  and  her  sons.  For 
some  cause  they  seemed  to  think  that  there  was  a  good 
chance  at  least  for  James  and  John  to  obtain  the  chief 
honors  next  to  those  held  by  Jesus  himself.  It  may  have 
been  because  they  felt  that  they  were  more  aristocratic 
than  the  rest,  and  the  best  things  belonged  to  them  by  that 
right. 

Another  reason  for  this  presumptuous  request  has  been 
suggested.  Their  superior  claim  may  have  rested  upon 
relationship.  In  John  19.  25  we  read  that  among  the 
women  who  were  standing  by  the  cross  of  Jesus  were  Mary 
his  mother,  and  his  mother'.s  sister,  Mary  the  wife  of  Clo- 
pas,  and  Mary  Magdalene.  How  many  women  are  enumer- 
ated here?  Three  or  four?  If  only  three,  then  Mary  the 
mother  had  a  sister  also  named  Mary.  Two  Marys  in  one 
family  are  not  to  be  accepted  without  good  reason.  If  four 
women  are  mentioned,  then  the  sister  of  Mary  the  mother 
of  Jesus  is  not  named.  When  we  turn  to  Mark  15.  40  we 
find  a  list  of  the  women  beholding  the  crucifixion,  and 

*»  Matt.  13.  12. 


30  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

among  them  are  named  Mary  Magdalene,  and  Mary  the 
mother  of  James  the  less  and  of  Joses,  and  Salome.  If 
these  lists  are  parallel,  then  Salome  in  Mark's  list  may  take 
the  place  of  the  sister  of  Mary  the  mother  of  Jesus  in  the 
list  by  John. 

When  we  remember  that  John  mentions  neither  his  own 
name  nor  that  of  James  nor  that  of  Salome  anywhere  in 
the  fourth  Gospel,  but  prefers  certain  phrases  to  represent 
them  instead  of  their  own  names,  we  may  be  inclined  to 
conclude  that  the  sister  of  the  mother  of  Jesus  mentioned 
by  John  is  his  own  mother  Salome.  If  so,  then  Jesus  and 
James  and  John  were  cousins ;  and  this  request  for  prefer- 
ence over  the  ten  and  all  the  other  disciples  came  from  his 
cousins  and  his  aunt.  His  own  brethren  had  refused  to 
believe  in  him.  Among  his  followers  these  cousins  were 
the  nearest  of  kin.  They  may  have  considered  that  a  good 
reason  for  asking  to  sit  at  his  right  hand  and  at  his  left 
in  the  Kingdom.  We  are  inclined  to  regard  these  two 
things,  their  family  aristocracy  (including  their  superior 
education  and  means)  and  their  family  relationship,  as 
constituting  two  elements  of  their  hope  that  Jesus  would 
give  them  the  preference  over  their  fellows. 

A  third  and  still  better  reason  for  the  hope  they  had 
within  them  was  the  fact  that  John  clearly  was  the  favorite 
among  the  twelve  and  that  James  shared  with  him  the 
privilege  of  closer  intimacy  with  the  Lord.  If  Jesus  really 
did  like  them  better  than  the  others,  let  him  prove  it  by 
promising  them  now  the  favorites'  final  reward.  If  James 
and  John  had  any  natural  or  acquired  refinement  of  manner 
which  superior  advantages  in  home  or  school  or  society  had 
furnished  them,  Jesus,  who  had  a  natural  affinity  for  all 
the  refinements  of  life,  would  like  them  all  the  better  on 
that  account.  If  they  were  the  sons  of  his  mother's  sister, 
his  own  cousins  by  blood  relationship,  he  would  be  drawn 
to  them  all  the  more  on  that  account.  If  Salome  was 
like  Mary,  and  her  sons  were  like  herself,  then  to  that 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  31 

extent  heredity  would  have  helped  to  make  the  characters 
of  James  and  John  congenial  to  that  of  Jesus. 

Salome  surely  was  a  good  woman,  religious  without 
reservation,  capable  of  entire  consecration  to  the  cause  she 
espoused,  ready  to  give  up  to  it  her  substance  and  her 
sons,  ready  to  furnish  it  forth  as  far  as  in  her  lay  with  both 
money  and  men  and  to  grant  it  ungrudgingly  the  devotion 
of  her  own  life.  She  was  one  of  those  mothers  who  have 
influenced  world  history  for  good  by  the  careful  training 
of  their  children  into  a  love  for  the  highest  and  best  and  a 
corresponding  hatred  for  the  low  and  the  mean.  Probably 
John  owed  more  to  her  than  to  any  other  mortal  before  he 
met  Jesus.  She  started  him  right,  and  he  went  in  a  straight 
line  through  life.  He  responded  to  the  highest  truth  which 
shone  upon  him  as  naturally  as  a  flower  might  open  to 
the  sun.  Like  the  Master  he  increased  in  wisdom  as  he- 
increased  in  stature,  and  he  increased  in  grace  as  gradually 
and  as  quietly  and  as  normally  as  he  increased  in  knowl- 
edge and  strength. 

There  seems  to  have  been  no  shock  or  crisis  anywhere 
in  his  religious  development.  When  John  the  Baptist  began 
preaching  at  the  Jordan,  and  it  became  apparent  that  the 
voice  of  prophecy  had  awakened  once  more  in  the  land 
of  Israel,  John  the  son  of  Salome  at  once  became  a  disciple, 
and  tarried  in  the  company  of  this  master,  listening  eagerly 
to  his  prophecies  and  learning  much  from  his  spirit  and 
ways.  When  John  the  Baptist  pointed  out  Jesus,  John  the 
son  of  Salome  became  one  of  the  first  disciples  of  this  new 
Alaster,  passing  as  readily  from  the  discipleship  of  the 
Baptist  into  that  of  Jesus  as  he  had  passed  from  the  in- 
structions of  his  mother  to  those  of  the  Jordan  evangelist. 
We  read  in  John  3.  21,  "He  that  doeth  the  truth  cometh  to 
the  light."  That  seemed  axiomatic  to  John.  Anybody 
who  sought  for  the  truth  would  come  to  the  light,  just  as 
soon  as  the  light  was  seen,  as  a  matter  of  course.  That 
had  been  the  way  with  his  own  life  throughout. 


32  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

In  this  respect  he  was  the  very  antipode  of  the  apostle 
Paul.  Paul's  life  had  been  revolutionized  by  that  Damas- 
cus vision.  He  had  been  transformed  from  the  chief 
antagonist  of  Christianity  into  its  chief  propagandist.  He 
had  been  changed  from  Saul  the  persecuting  Pharisee  into 
Paul  the  preacher  and  apostle.  He  was  converted ;  and  his 
conversion  made  him  a  new  man.  Old  things  had  passed 
away  and  all  things  had  become  new  with  him.  There  are 
such  experiences  to-day  and  some  of  those  who  have  them 
seem  to  think  that  they  are  the  most  desirable  experiences 
any  man  can  have.  They  are  not  only  desirable  but  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  a  man's  salvation  when  he  has  once  gone 
wrong;  but  surely  the  experience  of  Paul  is  not  the  only 
model  experience  for  the  human  race.  The  experience  of 
John  is  a  better  experience  than  that  of  Paul. 

Paul  and  John  were  both  good  men,  and  they  both  did 
great  service  for  the  Christian  Church.  Suppose  they  sat 
side  by  side  in  a  testimony  meeting,  and  we  asked  Paul  to, 
tell  us  when  he  was  converted.  Paul  would  say:  "It  was 
on  the  way  to  Damascus.  I  fell  upon  the  earth.  I  was 
blind  for  three  days.  Then  the  scales  fell  from  my  eyes, 
and  I  found  that  the  world  was  a  new  world  to  me.  Since 
then  I  have  been  a  changed  man.  All  my  aims  and  aspira- 
tions are  changed.  For  me  to  live  is  Christ  and  to  die  is 
gain." 

Then  we  ask  John  to  tell  us  when  he  was  converted,  and 
he  would  say:  "I  do  not  know.  I  cannot  point  to  any 
definite  time  or  place  of  my  conversion  as  Paul  can.  I 
never  had  such  a  vision  as  he  had  there  on  the  Damascus 
desert.  I  never  had  any  such  crisis  experience  in  my  life. 
My  mother  always  taught  me  to  do  what  was  right  and  to 
love  what  was  good  and  true,  and  I  always  tried  to  please 
her  by  obeying  her  and  the  precepts  of  the  Holy  Book. 
Then  I  became  a  disciple  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  he  never 
had  any  such  radical  transformation  of  character  as  Paul 
has  just  described.    He  was  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit  from 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  33 

his  mother's  womb.  It  had  been  foretold  that  that  would  be 
true  of  him,  and  his  life  proved  the  prophecy  reliable.  I 
tried  to  make  my  life  like  his  while  I  remained  with  him 
as  his  disciple.  Then  I  became  a  follower  of  Jesus,  and 
he  never  had  any  experience  like  this  Damascus  experience 
of  Paul.  The  grace  of  God  rested  upon  him  as  a  child,  and 
he  advanced  in  wisdom  and  stature  and  in  favor  with  God 
and  men  through  all  his  boyhood  and  youth.  He  was  full 
of  grace  and  truth  as  a  man.  I  tried  to  make  my  life  like 
his  as  his  disciple.  Of  his  fullness  I  received,  and  grace 
for  grace,  until  now  for  me  to  live  is  Christ  and  to  die  is 
gain." 

Suppose  we  should  turn  again  to  the  apostle  Paul  and 
say  to  him :  "What  do  you  think  of  that  as  a  model  Chris- 
tian experience  ?  Is  it  as  good  as  your  own  ?"  Do  you  not 
suppose  that  the  apostle  Paul  would  say,  'T  am  glad  that 
the  Lord  Jesus  came  into  this  world  to  save  sinners,  of 
whom  I  am  chief ;  but  I  would  rather  a  thousand  fold  that 
my  life  throughout  had  been  like  that  of  the  apostle  John 
or  that  of  John  the  Baptist  or  that  of  my  Master  and  Lord. 
John's  life  made  him  worthy  of  being  chosen  as  an  apostle, 
but  I  always  have  felt  that  I  was  not  worthy  to  be  called 
by  that  name.  If  I  had  my  life  to  live  over  again  I  would 
try  my  best  to  make  it  like  that  of  Jesus  or  John  the  Fore- 
runner or  John  the  Beloved"  ? 

Let  people  who  have  clear  and  definite  conversions  re- 
joice in  them.  Let  equally  good  Christians  who  have  no 
such  definite  transformation  of  character  to  point  out  in 
their  past  experiences  rejoice  that  such  a  crisis  has  not 
been  necessary  with  them.  The  Johannine  type  of  religious 
development  is  a  higher  and  better  type  for  us  to  covet 
and  to  endeavor  to  realize  in  the  Christian  home  and  the 
Christian  Church.^^     The  Pauline  type  is  a  blessed  possi- 


^  It  is  the  type  represented  by  Origan,  Thomas  ^  Kempis,  Melanch- 
thon,  Bengel,  Zinzendorf,  and  Wesley. 


34  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

bility  when  the  Johannine  type  has  not  been  attained.*^ 
The  normal  and  model  character  will  recognize  the  truth 
at  its  first  revelation  and  will  love  the  truth  from  the  first 
moment  of  its  recognition.  That  was  the  character  John 
had.  That  made  him  the  most  devoted  disciple  of  Jesus; 
and  that  made  him  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved. 

He  was  made  one  of  the  Chosen  Three,  and  accompanied 
Jesus  through  the  years  of  his  ministry.  He  was  the  last 
at  the  cross,  and  to  him  Jesus  committed  the  charge  of 
Mary  the  mother.  He  was  the  first  of  the  apostles  at  the 
open  tomb,  and  the  first  to  have  faith  In  the  fact  of  the 
Lord's  resurrection.  He  was  in  the  upper  room  and  at 
Pentecost  and  remained  in  Jerusalem  as  one  of  the  pillars 
of  the  church  for  some  years  afterward.  Later  he  was  an 
exile  on  the  island  of  Patmos  and  there  the  marvelous 
visions  of  the  Apocalypse  were  granted  him.  These  he 
wrote  down  in  a  book.  Still  later  he  wrote  the  fourth 
Gospel  in  order  that  men  might  believe  that  Jesus  was  the 
Christ.  Later  still  he  wrote  three  epistles  which  were 
cherished  in  the  church  as  the  last  memorials  of  the  last  of 
the  apostolic  band.  So  much  we  may  gather  from  the 
Scriptures  themselves.  To  fill  out  this  meager  outline  of 
John's  later  life  we  must  look  outside  of  the  Scriptures  and 
into  the  records  of  church  tradition  concerning  him. 

IV.    John  in  Tradition  and  Legend 

The  traditions  concerning  John  are  of  varying  value. 
Some  of  them  have  all  the  marks  of  truthfulness  and  come 
to  us  upon  reasonably  good  authority.  Others  have  all  the 
marks  of  pure  invention  and  evidently  are  the  product  of 
unbridled  imagination.  We  mention  first  a  few  of  the  more 
reliable:  i.  We  are  told  that  John  remained  in  Jerusalem 
until  the  death  of  Mary  the  mother  of  Jesus,  about  A.  D. 
48.     Irenseus  tells  us  that  later  he  took  up  his  residence  in 

^  It  is  the  type  represented  by  Augustine,  Luther,  and  Calvin. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  35 

Ephesus32 .  and  the  early  church  believed  that  he  composed 
the  fourth  Gospel  and  the  three  epistles  while  he  was  living 
in  this  city.  Most  of  the  more  trustworthy  anecdotes  con- 
cerning the  apostle  are  related  of  him  during  his  residence 
in  Ephesus  in  his  old  age. 

Between  the  residence  in  Jerusalem  and  the  residence  in 
Ephesus  there  is  an  interval  of  possibly  a  score  of  years 
of  which  we  know  nothing  at  all.  Tertullian  says  that  John 
came  to  Rome  in  this  period  and  there  was  thrown  into  a 
cauldron  of  boiling  oil,  from  which  he  came  forth  unhurt. 
He  adds  that  John  immediately  was  banished  to  his  island 
exile.^^  Jerome  repeats  this  story  and  declares  that  John 
came  forth  from  this  bath  in  boiling  oil  more  sound  and 
vigorous  than  when  he  was  thrown  in,  and  he  bids  us 
observe  that,  although  John  afterward  died  a  natural  death, 
he  at  this  time  "in  spirit  failed  not  of  martyrdom,  and  that 
he  drank  the  cup  of  confession  which  the  three  young  men 
in  the  fiery  furnace  also  drank,  although  the  persecutor  did 
not  shed  his  blood."^*  With  this  single  glimpse  of  the 
apostle's  experiences  in  this  interval  we  may  trace  his 
course  from  Jerusalem  to  Rome  and  from  Rome  to  Ephesus 
and  from  Ephesus  to  Patmos  and  from  Patmos  to  Ephesus 
again.  Of  these  four  places  of  residence  we  may  quote 
scriptural  authority'  for  the  first  and  the  fourth.  We  may 
feel  rather  doubtful  about  the  second,  though  it  comes 
within  the  range  of  possibility.^^  We  may  feel  reasonably 
assured  about  the  third,  because  of  the  practical  concur- 
rence of  all  authorities  among  the  church  Fathers  at  this 
point. 


^  Adv.  Haer.  III.  i,  i ;  3,  4.  So  also  Apollonius,  Polycrates,  Clement 
of  Alexandria,  Origen,  Tertullian,  Eusebius,  Jerome. 

^*  De  Praesc.  Haer.,  36. 

^  Commentary  on  Matthew  20.  23. 

^^Renan,  L'Antechrist,  XXX,  and  Salmon,  Introduction,  p.  396, 
think  it  probable  that  John  was  with  Peter  in  Rome  before  Peter's 
martyrdom  and  that  John  escaped  afterward  into  Asia  Minor. 


36  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

The  city  of  Ephesus  seems  to  have  been  peculiarly  privi- 
leged in  the  apostolic  age.  Its  Christian  church  v^as  founded 
by  the  apostle  Paul,  and  he  labored  longer  in  this  city  than 
in  any  other  of  the  great  centers  of  his  missionary  activity. 
To  the  church  in  Ephesus  Paul  v^rote  his  most  sublime 
epistle,  the  final  formulation  of  his  faith.  Timothy  was  a 
bishop  in  Ephesus  in  later  days;  and  then,  last  of  all,  the 
apostle  John  came  here  to  live  and  blessed  all  the  neighbor- 
ing churches  with  his  presence  and  preaching,  his  admoni- 
tion and  instruction,  his  Gospel  and  epistles,  his  apostolic 
authority  and  his  holy  life. 

It  was  the  fitting  place  for  the  last  of  the  apostles  to 
spend  the  last  of  his  days.  It  was  the  chief  vantage  point 
for  apostolic  direction  and  supervision.  Jerusalem  had 
fallen.  Rome  had  not  yet  become  the  center  of  Christen- 
dom. Asia  Minor  was  the  most  vital  portion  of  the  Chris- 
tian commonwealth  at  this  period,  and  Ephesus  was  the 
greatest  city  of  Asia  Minor.  It  was  here,  as  in  a  watch 
tower,  that  the  aged  apostle  established  himself.  It  was 
from  this  center  that  he  went  out  upon  his  apostolic  visita- 
tions, and  it  was  from  this  center  that  he  sent  out  his  Gospel 
and  his  epistles,  and  it  was  in  this  center  that  he  composed 
the  Apocalypse  and  preached  and  lived  the  gospel  possi- 
bilities revealed  in  Christ.^^ 

2.  Polycarp  was  a  disciple  and  friend  of  the  apostle  John, 
and  Irenseus  was  a  disciple  and  friend  of  Polycarp.  Irenseus 
tells  us  that  Polycarp  said  that  "John,  the  disciple  of  the 
Lord,  going  to  bathe  at  Ephesus,  and  perceiving  Cerinthus 
within,  rushed  out  of  the  bathhouse  without  bathing,  ex- 
claiming. Let  us  fly,  lest  even  the  bathhouse  fall  down, 
because  Cerinthus,  the  enemy  of  the  truth,  is  within/'^T 


'» The  modern  name  of  Ephesus  is  Ayasalouk,  which  is  a  corruption 
of  dyioi  Qe6\oyos,  "the  saintly  divine,"  "the  holy  theologian,"  the  name 
given  to  John  and  thus  preserved  to  this  day. 
"Adv.  Haer.,  III.  iii.  4. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHK  37 

We  can  well  believe  that  this  story  is  true.  Cerinthus  was 
a  heretic,  and  it  would  be  like  John  to  show  his  reprobation 
of  a  heretic  by  such  action  as  Polycarp  had  witnessed. 

3.  Another  side  of  the  apostle's  character  is  well  illus- 
trated in  a  story  told  us  by  Clement  of  Alexandria.  He 
declares  that  the  story  is  no  myth  but  a  true  tradition  con- 
cerning John;  and  it  is  so  characteristic  of  the  apostle  of 
love  that  we  are  ready  to  accept  it  on  his  authority.  He 
tells  us  that  John  was  invited  from  Ephesus  into  all  the 
contiguous  territories,  to  ordain  ministers  and  to  appoint 
bishops  and  to  set  in  order  all  the  affairs  of  the  churches. 
Then  he  proceeds :  "Having  come  to  one  of  the  cities  not 
far  off,  and  seeing  a  youth,  powerful  in  body,  comely  in 
appearance,  and  ardent,  he  said  to  the  bishop  appointed, 
'This  youth  I  commit  to  you  in  all  earnestness,  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  church,  and  witH  Christ  as  witness.'  Then  he 
set  out  for  Ephesus. 

"The  bishop  taking  home  the  youth  committed  to  him, 
reared,  kept,  cherished,  and  finally  baptized  him.  After  this 
he  relaxed  his  stricter  care  and  guardianship,  under  the  idea 
that  the  seal  of  the  Lord  he  had  set  on  him  was  a  complete 
protection  to  him.  But  on  his  obtaining  premature  free- 
dom, some  youths  of  his  age,  idle,  dissolute,  and  adepts  in 
evil  courses,  corrupt  him.  First  they  entice  him  by  many 
costly  entertainments ;  then  afterward  by  night  issuing  forth 
for  highway  robbery,  they  take  him  along  with  them.  Then 
they  dared  to  execute  together  something  greater.  He  by 
degrees  got  accustomed ;  and  from  greatness  of  nature, 
when  he  had  gone  aside  from  the  right  path,  and  like  a 
hard-mouthed  and  powerful  horse,  had  taken  the  bit  be- 
tween his  teeth,  rushed  with  all  the  more  force  down  into 
the  depths;  and  having  entirely  despaired  of  salvation  in 
God,  he  no  longer  meditated  what  was  insignificant,  but 
having  perpetrated  some  great  exploit,  now  that  he  was 
once  lost,  he  made  up  his  mind  to  a  like  fate  with  the  rest. 
Taking  them  and  forming  a  band  of  robbers,  he  was  the 


38  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

prompt  captain  of  the  bandits,  the  fiercest,  the  bloodiest, 
the  cruelest. 

"Time  passed,  and  some  necessity  having  emerged,  they 
send  again  for  John.  He,  when  he  had  settled  the  other 
matters  on  account  of  which  he  came,  said,  'Come  now,  O 
bishop,  restore  to  us  the  deposit  which  I  and  the  Saviour 
committed  to  thee  in  the  face  of  the  church,  over  which 
you  preside,  as  witness.'  The  other  was  at  first  confounded, 
thinking  that  it  was  a  false  charge  about  money  which  he 
did  not  get;  and  he  could  neither  believe  the  allegation  re- 
garding what  he  had  not,  nor  disbelieve  John.  But  when 
he  said,  T  demand  the  young  man,  and  the  soul  of  the 
brother,'  the  old  man,  groaning  deeply,  and  bursting  into 
tears,  said,  'He  is  dead.'  'How  and  what  kind  of  death?' 
'He  is  dead,'  he  said,  'to  God.  For  he  turned  wicked  and 
abandoned,  and  at  last  a  robber;  and  now  he  has  taken 
possession  of  the  mountain  in  front  of  the  church,  along 
with  a  band  like  him.'  Rending,  therefore,  his  clothes,  and 
striking  his  head  with  great  lamentation,  the  apostle  said: 
'It  was  a  fine  guard  of  a  brother's  soul  I  left !  But  let  a 
horse  be  brought  me,  and  let  some  one  be  my  guide  on  the 
way.'  He  rode  away,  just  as  he  was,  straight  from  the 
church. 

"On  coming  to  the  place  he  is  arrested  by  the  robbers' 
outpost;  neither  fleeing  nor  entreating,  but  crying,  'It  was 
for  this  I  came.  Lead  me  to  your  captain,'  who  meanwhile 
was  waiting,  all  armed  as  he  was.  But  when  he  recognized 
John  as  he  advanced,  he  turned,  ashamed,  to  flight.  The 
other  followed  with  all  his  might,  forgetting  his  age,  crying : 
'Why,  my  son,  dost  thou  flee  from  me,  thy  father,  unarmed, 
old?  Son,  pity  me.  Fear  not;  thou  hast  still  hope  of  life.  I 
will  give  account  to  Christ  for  thee.  If  need  be,  I  will 
willingly  endure  thy  death,  as  the  Lord  did  death  for  us. 
For  thee  I  will  surrender  my  life.  Stand,  believe,  Christ 
hath  sent  me.' 

"And  he,  when  he  heard,  first  stood,  looking  down;  then 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  39 

threw  down  his  arms,  then  trembled  and  wept  bitterly.  And 
on  the  old  man  approaching,  he  embraced  him,  speaking  for 
himself  with  lamentations  as  he  could,  and  baptized  a 
second  time  with  tears,  concealing  only  his  right  hand.  The 
other  pledging,  and  assuring  him  on  oath  that  he  would 
find  forgiveness  for  himself  from  the  Saviour,  beseeching 
and  falling  on  his  knees,  and  kissing  his  right  hand  itself, 
as  now  purified  by  repentance,  led  him  back  to  the  church. 
Then,  by  supplicating  with  copious  prayers,  and  striving 
along  with  him  in  continual  fastings,  did  not  depart,  as 
they  say,  till  he  restored  him  to  the  church,  presenting  in 
him  a  great  example  of  true  repentance,  and  a  great  token 
of  regeneration,  a  trophy  of  the  resurrection  for  which  we 
hope."^* 

How  like  the  apostle  John  all  of  this  seems ! — his  attrac- 
tion to  the  promising  youth  and  his  intuitive  perception  of 
his  possibilities,  the  unhesitating  and  public  rebuke  of  the 
bishop,  the  love  which  defied  danger  and  strove  with  the 
recalcitrant  until  his  heart  was  melted  and  his  will  was 
won,  and  in  it  all  that  unbounded  confidence  in  the  power 
of  his  gospel  to  help  and  to  save.  We  see  no  compelling 
reason  to  question  the  truth  of  this  tale. 

4.  Jerome  tells  us  that  in  his  extreme  old  age  John,  no 
longer  able  to  walk,  was  carried  to  the  church;  and  there 
he  was  not  able  to  preach  a  sermon  but  contented  himself 
with  repeating  over  and  over,  "Little  children,  love  one 
another,  love  one  another,  love  one  another."  When  the 
disciples  wearied  of  these  words  and  asked  him  why  he 
said  nothing  more  he  answered  that  this  was  the  Lord's 
commandment,  and  if  this  were  done  it  would  be  all-suffi- 
cient.   Prcoceptum  Domini  est,  et,  si  solum  fiat,  sufHcit.^^ 

5.  All  the  traditions  seem  to  agree  that  John  outlived 
all  the  other  apostles  and  died  in  Ephesus  in  extreme  old 


^  Quis  Div.  Salv.,  XLII.  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  ii,  p.  603. 
"  Commentary  on  Gal.  6.  10. 


40  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

age.  Jerome  says  that  he  lived  sixty-eight  years  after  the 
crucifixion,  and  that  would  fix  his  death  somewhere  about 
A.  D.  ICO.  Epiphanius  says  that  John  was  ninety-four 
years  old  when  he  died,  and  Suidas  says  he  lived  to  be  one 
hundred  and  twenty.  We  know  as  little  about  the  date  of 
his  death  as  we  do  about  the  date  of  his  birth.  We  think 
it  probable  that  he  was  the  youngest  of  the  apostles,  and 
possibly  ten  years  younger  than  Jesus.'**^  We  are  ready  to 
accept  the  tradition  that  he  lived  longest,  surviving  the 
whole  band  of  the  apostles,  and  that  he  died  a  very  old 
and  feeble  man. 

There  are  many  other  traditions  concerning  John,  some 
of  which  may  have  some  basis  of  truth,  but  most  of  which 
are  the  product  of  wild  imaginations.  We  mention  a  few 
of  these  as  samples  of  grotesqueness  in  ecclesiastical  fiction : 
I.  John  Cassian,  a  hermit  of  the  fifth  century  and  the  foun- 
der of  monasticism  in  the  West,  says  that  it  had  been  told 
him  that  John  in  his  old  age  had  a  tame  partridge.  One 
day  he  was  amusing  himself  with  it  and  caressing  the  bird 
by  stroking  its  head  when  a  young  man  returning  from 
the  chase  found  him  engaged  in  this  trivial  occupation  and 
said:  "Art  thou  that  John  whose  singular  renown  led  even 
a  man  like  me  to  desire  to  know  thee?  How,  then,  canst 
thou  occupy  thyself  with  an  employment  like  this?"  The 
apostle  replied,  "What  is  that  in  thy  hand?"  He  answered, 
"A  bow."  Said  John,  "Why  dost  thou  not  always  carry 
it  bent?"  He  answered,  "Because  it  would  in  that  case 
lose  its  elasticity;  and,  when  it  was  necessary  to  use  it,  it 
would  fail  me  from  the  too  continuous  strain."  "Just  so," 
said  the  apostle.  "Let  not  this  slight  and  brief  relaxation 
of  mind  perplex  thee,  since  without  it  the  spirit  would 
flag  from  unremitted  strain,  and  it  would  fail  me  when  the 
call  of  duty  came."  It  is  a  pretty  story.  It  may  be  a  true 
story.    It  comes  from  a  rather  remote  source,  however,  and 


*o  So  Krenkel,  Der  Apostel  Johannes,  p.  129. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  41 

it  has  been  told  in  substance  of  so  many  other  people  as 
well  as  John  that  we  are  not  disposed  to  give  it  much  credit. 

2.  In  the  Acts  of  the  Holy  Apostle  and  Evangelist  John 
we  read  that  John's  fame  spread  as  far  as  to  Rome,  and 
the  emperor  sent  to  Ephesus  for  him.  On  the  journey 
from  Ephesus  to  Rome  John  ate  nothing  except  one  date 
on  each  Lord's  Day  and  the  soldiers  who  brought  him  to 
the  emperor  declared  that  he  was  a  god  and  no  man,  for 
he  could  live  without  eating  bread.  He  bore  his  witness 
before  Domitian,  and  the  emperor  demanded  a  sign  that 
what  he  said  was  true.  "Immediately  John  asked  for  a 
deadly  poison.  They  brought  it  on  the  instant.  John, 
therefore,  having  taken  it,  put  it  into  a  large  cup,  and  filled 
it  with  water,  and  mixed  it,  and  cried  out  with  a  loud  voice, 
and  said,  'In  thy  name,  Jesus  Christ,  Son  of  God,  I  drink 
the  cup  which  thou  wilt  sweeten ;  and  the  poison  in  it  do 
thou  mingle  with  thy  Holy  Spirit,  and  make  it  become  a 
draught  of  life  and  salvation,  for  the  healing  of  soul  and 
body,  for  digestion  and  harmless  assimilation,  for  faith  not 
to  be  repented  of,  for  an  undeniable  testimony  of  death 
as  the  cup  of  thanksgiving.' 

"When  he  had  drunk  the  cup,  those  standing  beside 
Domitian  expected  that  he  was  going  to  fall  to  the  ground 
in  convulsions.  And  when  John  stood,  cheerful,  and  talked 
with  them  safe,  Domitian  was  enraged  against  those  who 
had  given  the  poison,  as  having  spared  John.  But  they 
swore  by  the  fortune  and  health  of  the  king,  and  said  that 
there  could  not  be  a  stronger  poison  than  this.  And  John, 
understanding  what  they  were  whispering  to  one  another, 
said  to  the  king:  'Do  not  take  it  ill,  O  king,  but  let  a  trial 
be  made  and  thou  shalt  learn  the  power  of  the  poison. 
Bring  some  condemned  criminal  from  the  prison.'  And 
when  he  had  come,  John  put  water  into  the  cup,  and  swirled 
it  round,  and  gave  it  with  all  the  dregs  to  the  condemned 
criminal.  And  he,  having  taken  it  and  drunk,  immediately 
fell  down  and  died."     It  is  somewhat  of  a  relief  to  us  to 


42  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

read  further  that  John  told  the  emperor  that  he  did  not 
desire  to  become  a  murderer  in  his  august  presence  and 
taking  the  dead  man  by  the  hand  he  raised  him  up  alive.'*^ 
This  is  a  sample  of  many  of  the  marvelous  tales  which 
gathered  about  the  name  of  the  great  apostle. 

3.  One  of  the  most  amusing  of  John's  miracles,  recorded 
in  the  Apocryphal  Acts  of  Saint  John,  is  thus  reported  by 
Salmon  in  his  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament  :^2  "Qn 
their  journey  the  party  stopped  at  an  uninhabited  caravan- 
serai. They  found  there  but  one  bare  couch,  and  having 
laid  clothes  on  it  they  made  the  apostle  lie  on  it,  while  the 
rest  of  the  party  laid  themselves  down  to  sleep  on  the  floor. 
But  John  was  troubled  by  a  great  multitude  of  bugs,  until, 
after  having  tossed  sleepless  for  half  the  night,  he  said  to 
them,  in  the  hearing  of  all,  'I  say  unto  you,  O  ye  bugs,  be 
ye  kindly  considerate;  leave  your  home  for  this  night,  and 
go  to  rest  in  a  place  which  is  far  from  the  servants  of  God.' 

"At  this  the  disciples  laughed,  while  the  apostle  turned  to 
sleep,  and  they  conversed  gently,  so  as  not  to  disturb  him. 
In  the  morning  the  first  to  awake  went  to  the  door,  and 
there  they  saw  a  great  multitude  of  bugs  standing.  The 
rest  collected  to  view,  and  at  last  John  awoke  and  saw  like- 
wise. Then  (mindful  rather  of  his  grateful  obligation  to 
the  bugs  than  of  the  comfort  of  the  next  succeeding 
traveler)  he  said,  'O  ye  bugs,  since  ye  have  been  kind  and 
have  observed  my  charge,  return  to  your  place.'  No  sooner 
had  he  said  this  and  risen  from  the  couch,  than  the  bugs 
all  in  a  run  rushed  from  the  door  to  the  couch,  climbed  up 
the  legs,  and  disappeared  into  the  joinings.  And  John  said, 
'See  how  these  creatures,  having  heard  the  voice  of  a  man, 
have  obeyed ;  but  we,  hearing  the  voice  of  God,  neglect  and 
disobey ;  and  how  long,  how  long  ?'  " 

We  need  not  spend  any  time  upon  stories  like  these.  We 
do  not  even  care  to  ask  whether  any  experience  of  the 

*'  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  viii,  p.  561. 

^2  Salmon,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  p.  350. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  43 

apostle  ever  furnished  the  slightest  basis  of  fact  for  such  a 
narrative. 

4.  In  spite  of  the  fact  that  a  warning  and  correction  had 
been  appended  to  the  fourth  Gospel,^^  the  belief  maintained 
itself  that  the  apostle  John  never  had  died.  One  tradition 
stated  that  he  made  provision  for  the  care  of  the  church 
after  his  departure  and  then  asked  some  of  the  brethren 
to  accompany  him  with  baskets  and  spades.  Coming  to  the 
grave  of  a  certain  Christian,  he  told  them  to  dig;  and  as 
they  did  so  he  urged  them  to  make  the  trench  deep.  When 
it  was  finished  he  threw  his  outer  garments  into  it  and 
stood  and  prayed :  "Receive  the  soul  of  thy  John.  .  .  .  And 
as  I  go  to  thee,  let  the  fire  withdraw,  let  the  darkness  be 
overcome,  let  the  furnace  be  slackened,  let  Gehenna  be 
extinguished,  let  the  angels  follow,  let  the  demons  be 
afraid,  let  the  princes  be  broken  in  pieces,  let  the  powers 
of  darkness  fall,  let  the  places  on  the  right  hand  stand  firm, 
let  those  on  the  left  abide  not,  let  the  devil  be  muzzled,  let 
Satan  be  laughed  to  scorn,  let  his  madness  be  tamed,  let 
his  wrath  be  broken,  let  his  children  be  trodden  under  foot, 
and  let  all  his  root  be  uprooted ;  and  grant  to  me  to  accom- 
plish the  journey  to  thee,  not  insulted,  not  despitefully 
treated,  and  to  receive  what  thou  hast  promised  to  those 
who  live  in  purity,  and  who  have  loved  a  holy  life."  Then 
he  sent  the  brethren  away,  and  when  they  came  back  on 
the  morrow  they  did  not  find  him,  but  his  sandals  were 
lying  there,  and  a  fountain  was  welling  up  at  that  place.'*'* 

5.  Another  legend  says  that  he  was  buried,  but  that  he 
was  only  asleep  in  his  grave;  and  Augustine  tells  us  that 
it  had  been  reported  to  him  that  the  ground  above  the  grave 
rose  and  fell  with  John's  breathing  and  that  the  moving 
dust  bore  its  continuous  witness  to  the  truth  that  the  apostle 
though  laid  to  rest  was  alive  and  breathing  still.'*^ 


«  John  21.  23. 

**  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  viii,  p.  563, 

*^  Tract,  in  Joh.,  cxxiv,  2. 


44  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

6.  Still  another  legend  declared  that  John  had  been  trans- 
lated, like  Elijah,  and  would  appear  again  to  herald  the 
second  coming  of  the  Lord.  The  Greek  Church  still  ob- 
serves the  Feast  of  the  Translation  of  the  Body  of  John. 
Beza  tells  us  that  an  impostor  appeared  in  his  day  who 
claimed  to  be  the  apostle  John  returned  to  the  earth.  This 
claimant  was  sent  back  to  heaven,  like  Elijah,  in  a  chariot 
of  fire ;  for  he  was  burned  at  the  stake  in  Toulouse. 

We  dismiss  all  these  legends  as  unworthy  of  any  serious 
consideration,  and  we  turn  back  to  the  more  trustworthy 
traditions  and  to  the  facts  recorded  in  the  New  Testament 
to  see  if  we  can  derive  from  a  careful  study  of  them  any 
vital  and  consistent  conception  of  the  man  of  whom  these 
things  are  told. 

V.    John  the  Son  of  Thunder 

We  do  not  know  as  much  of  the  apostle  John  as  most 
people  think  we  do.  We  know  too  little  to  be  absolutely 
certain  about  any  character  analysis  we  may  attempt  to 
present.  Of  one  thing,  however,  we  may  feel  assured. 
Whatever  characterization  the  Master  may  have  given  to 
John  will  be  a  reliable  one.  Now,  the  Master  gave  a  name 
to  James  and  to  John  which  must  have  been  suggested  by 
some  peculiarity  of  their  nature  and  conduct,  something 
which  made  them  different  from  other  men  and  worthy  to 
bear  the  title  he  chose  for  them  and  assigned  to  them  for 
their  very  own.  The  Master  called  them,  Boanerges,  Sons 
of  Thunder !  What  an  utterly  surprising  fact  that  is  to 
begin  with ! 

We  thought  the  apostle  John  was  gentle  and  sweet.  We 
thought  he  was  one  of  these  loving,  clinging,  delicate,  sensi- 
tive souls  who  would  shrink  from  anything  which  was 
startling  or  shocking  or  loud.  We  thought  there  was  some- 
thing refined  and  girlish  and  effeminate  about  the  apostle 
John;  and  the  Master  calls  him  Sir  Thunderclap,  Boaner- 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  45 

ges,  a  Son  of  Thunder!  The  Master  probably  was  right 
in  giving  him  that  name.  It  must  have  suited  him  and 
there  must  have  been  good  and  sufficient  reasons  for  it  or 
the  Lord  never  would  have  chosen  that  name  for  him.  It 
would  be  well  for  us  to  begin  our  study  of  John's  character 
from  this  point  of  view.  Here  will  be  a  fundamental 
element  in  his  make-up. 

Why  was  John  called  a  son  of  thunder?  i.  It  surely  was 
not  because  he  had  a  loud  voice  or  a  boisterous  manner. 
It  was  not  because  he  roared  in  his  talking.  It  was  not 
because  he  was  a  man  of  thundering  speech.  There  have 
been  preachers  whose  heavy  voices  shook  the  buildings  in 
which  they  spoke  and  whose  tones  rolled  like  thunder 
among  the  rafters,  and  they  may  have  thought  that  they 
were  Boanerges  like  James  and  John.  There  have  been 
men  who  measured  their  personal  satisfaction  with  their 
own  performance  in  the  pulpit  according  to  the  degree  in 
which  they  had  wrought  themselves  up  into  a  storm  of 
emotion  or  a  whirlwind  of  passion,  and  according  as  they 
freely  perspired  and  fairly  bellowed  they  regarded  them- 
selves a  thundering  success.  They  were  Boanerges  of  a 
sort ;  but  they  were  not  like  James  and  John.  Jesus  was 
too  quiet  himself  to  be  attracted  by  any  habitual  tempestu- 
ousness  of  manner.  James  and  John  would  not  have  be- 
longed to  the  Chosen  Three  if  they  could  have  been  heard 
a  quarter  of  a  mile  every  time  they  spoke.  Even  Elijah 
had  learned  that  an  earthquake  and  a  whirlwind  and  fire 
were  not  as  impressive  and  as  helpful  as  a  still  small  voice. 
We  feel  sure  that  the  title  which  Jesus  gave  did  not  mark 
some  personal  peculiarity  of  manner  or  speech,  but,  rather, 
called  attention  to  some  deeper  characteristic  of  the  inner 
spirit  of  the  man. 

2.  Some  have  thought  that  James  and  John  were  given 
this  name  because  they  were  disciples  of  John  the  Baptist, 
whose  preaching  startled  the  whole  land  like  a  thunderclap, 
whose  appeals  to  conscience  were  like  thunderbolts,  and 


46  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

whose  denunciations  of  wrongdoing  rolled  like  thunder 
clouds  over  the  hearts  of  men.  John  the  Baptist  was  the 
Elijah  of  the  New  Testament.  Jesus  said  that  James  and 
John  had  the  spirit  of  the  Elijah  of  the  Old  Testament. 
That  spirit  of  the  old  Elijah  was  the  spirit  of  the  new 
Elijah  and  probably  James  and  John  had  learned  it  from 
him.  In  so  far  as  it  may  have  represented  a  spirit  of  in- 
tolerance, a  spirit  of  harshness  which  would  visit  quick 
judgment  upon  the  wrongdoer  or  would  leave  the  sinner 
to  the  endless  endurance  of  his  fate,  it  did  not  agree  with 
the  spirit  of  Christ ;  and  it  needed  to  be  rebuked  by  him. 

There  are  some  preachers  to-day  whose  whole  ministry 
is  like  that  of  John  the  Baptist.  Their  sermons  always  are 
full  of  thunder  and  lightning.  They  always  are  striking 
at  something  or  somebody.  They  always  are  denouncing 
present  conditions.  They  lay  the  ax  at  the  root  of  the 
tree  and,  not  content  with  that,  they  lay  to  with  thundering 
blows  until  the  tree  seems  to  be  tottering  to  its  fall.  The 
whole  heaven  gets  black  while  they  talk  and  the  muttering 
of  God's  wrath  is  about  all  that  the  people  hear.  John  the 
Baptist  was  very  much  disappointed  when  Jesus  came.  To 
his  surprise  the  ministry  of  Jesus  was  not  a  ministry  of 
vengeance  and  wrath.  He  did  not  wield  the  ax  as  John 
had  thought  he  would.  He  did  not  burn  up  the  chafif  with 
unquenchable  fire.  He  did  not  blast  and  ruin  and  devastate. 
He  healed  and  helped  and  blessed  and  saved  and  preached 
good  tidings  instead  of  instant  and  constant  woe.  He  could 
blaze  with  indignation  when  necessity  required,  but  it  was 
only  once  or  twice  that  he  thought  it  necessary  to  blaze 
at  all.  His  ministry  was  more  like  that  of  the  summer  sun- 
shine than  that  of  the  thunder  cloud.  Thunderstorms  soon 
thunder  themselves  out.  They  do  not  keep  thundering  all 
the  time.  They  serve  their  purpose  and  then  they  pass 
away.  These  men  who  keep  thundering  all  the  time 
generally  have  to  steal  somebody  else's  thunder  to  keep  up 
the  supply ;  and  they  are  belated  individuals  anyway.    They 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  47 

belong  to  the  dispensation  of  the  Law ;  they  have  not  come 
on  into  the  dispensation  of  grace  and  truth.  They  make 
the  mistake  of  thinking  that  to  be  a  Boanerges  one  must 
be  a  John  the  Baptist.  A  Boanerges  is  one  who  can  be  a 
Boanerges  upon  occasion  and  not  one  who  is  a  Boanerges 
all  the  time.  A  man  may  be  a  Boanerges  and  yet  be  a 
disciple  of  Christ. 

Here,  then,  we  have  a  key  to  John's  character.  3.  Jesus 
gave  him  this  name  because  he  had  that  in  him  which  could 
flash  fire  at  times.  A  man  cannot  flash  fire  unless  he  has 
some  flint  in  him.  It  runs  up  and  down  his  backbone  and 
it  shows  in  his  face.  The  old  prophet  said,  "Therefore 
have  I  set  my  face  like  a  flint."'**''  Not  all  of  the  people 
of  God  have  faces  like  that.  There  are  a  few  flintfaces  in 
every  age  and  in  every  community,  but  not  many  are  of 
that  caliber.  John  could  set  his  face  like  a  flint.  There 
were  volcanic  depths  in  his  nature  and  there  were  erup- 
tions from  those  depths  upon  occasion,  and  sometimes  they 
came  very  unexpectedly  and  they  caught  the  unwary  in 
their  blistering  lava  floods.  John  was  a  man  of  intense 
convictions,  backed  by  a  sublime  courage  and  faith.  He 
was  a  man  who  made  up  his  mind,  and  whose  purpose 
thereafter  was  unalterably  fixed.  He  came  to  a  knowledge 
of  the  truth,  and  then  he  knew  he  was  right  and  he  was 
ready  to  risk  for  the  truth  and  for  the  right  all  that  he  had 
and  all  that  he  was.  He  was  a  man  who  was  ready  to  be 
singular  and  exceptional  and  radical,  and  if  need  be  dis- 
agreeable at  any  time  and  at  any  place.  He  was  a  man 
after  God's  own  heart.  He  was  the  disciple  whom  Jesus 
loved. 

Let  us  see  this  thing  as  clearly  as  we  may.  John  was 
like  Jesus.  Both  of  them,  both  John  and  Jesus,  could  be 
Boanerges  upon  occasion.  Jesus  was  the  beloved  Son,  in 
whom  the  Father  was  well  pleased.    John  was  the  beloved 

« Isa.  50.  7. 


48  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

disciple  who  reclined  on  Jesus's  breast.  They  are  the  types 
of  saintliness  to  all  the  world.  Some  people  seem  to  think 
that  a  saint  of  God,  a  man  after  God's  own  heart,  will  be 
a  white-complexioned,  lily-fingered  sentimentalist,  with 
dreamy  eyes,  and  a  pensively  sweet  and  infantilely  clinging 
disposition.  Their  mental  image  of  Jesus  is  that  of  a  man 
with  a  pale  and  bloodless  countenance,  framed  in  an  aureole 
of  golden  hair  which  is  parted  in  the  middle  and  falls  in 
flowing  locks  upon  his  shoulders  and  adown  his  back,  clad 
in  a  snow-white  robe,  and  with  his  hands  always  spread  in 
benediction.  The  real  Jesus  was  a  Nazarene  Jew,  a  Pales- 
tine carpenter,  with  hands  made  horny  in  toil,  and  with 
feet  blistered  in  long  travel,  full  of  manly  vigor  in  form 
and  speech,  as  approachable  as  Abraham  Lincoln,  as  gentle 
as  John  Wesley,  and  at  the  same  time  as  lionlike  and  bold 
as  Martin  Luther,  and  as  true  to  conscience  and  to  principle 
as  John  Knox ;  and  just  as  full  of  courage  and  conviction 
and  immovable  purpose  of  will  and  therefore  just  as  dis- 
agreeable to  many  of  his  contemporaries  as  were  Lincoln 
and  Luther,  Wesley  and  Knox.  There  was  nothing  of 
softness  or  effeminacy  or  flabbiness  about  our  Christ,  and 
none  of  these  things  ought  to  be  in  any  Christian  saint. 
Ideal  sainthood  has  nothing  to  do  with  any  of  them. 

How  do  most  people  picture  to  themselves  the  apostle 
John?  With  the  face  of  a  sentimental  young  girl,  with 
dreamy,  wistful,  immature  features,  melting  blue  eyes,  and 
blonde  curls  falling  in  free  abandon  about  his  ears.  We 
get  that  face  from  the  artists  who  seem  to  think  that  John 
furnished  the  feminine  quality  in  the  company  of  the 
twelve.  John  did  not  have  the  face  of  a  girl ;  he  had  a 
face  set  like  a  flint.  John's  hair  was  neither  brown  nor 
blonde  nor  bleached.  On  the  contrary,  in  all  probability 
it  was  as  black  as  a  coal.  His  eyes  too  were  black;  and 
they  could  flash  fire  from  their  somber  depths.  John  was 
a  Boanerges.  He  was  no  weakling;  he  was  a  warrior.  He 
was  no  sentimentalist;  he  had  too  much  sense.    He  was  a 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  49 

man  of  temper  as  well  as  tenderness.  He  was  a  man  of 
nerve  and  of  backbone,  a  man  of  stamina  and  of  strength. 
Jesus  liked  him  because  he  was  a  man,  and  a  manly  man. 

It  is  all  right  for  a  woman  to  be  a  woman,  and  she  can 
be  just  as  womanly  as  she  please  and  we  will  like  her  all 
the  better  for  it.  That  is  her  business ;  but  no  man  has  any 
business  to  enter  into  competition  with  her  in  that  field. 
John  never  thought  of  doing  it.  It  is  a  great  injustice  to 
him,  for  which  the  artists  have  become  responsible,  that 
John  should  be  doomed  to  be  pictured  so  continuously 
as  a  sweet  young  girl.  Frederick  Denison  Maurice  and 
Charles  Kingsley  were  looking  at  Leonardo  da  Vinci's 
painting  of  "The  Last  Supper,"  and  Maurice  complained 
that  even  that  great  master  had  given  John  too  sentimental 
and  girlish  a  face.  Kingsley  asked,  "Why  not?"  Maurice 
replied :  "Was  not  John  the  apostle  of  love  ?  Then  in  such 
a  world  of  misery  and  hate  as  this  world  is  do  you  not 
think  he  would  have  more  furrows  in  his  cheek  than  all  the 
other  apostles?"  He  had  more  furrows  in  his  cheek,  more 
vigor  in  his  voice,  greater  depths  of  feeling  and  sympathy 
within  him,  and  greater  possibilities  of  hate  because  greater 
possibilities  of  love.  John  was  a  Boanerges  because  he  was 
a  man  of  moral  strength,  a  man  of  sublime  courage,  a  man 
of  intense  convictions,  a  man  capable  of  holy  heroism. 
Jesus  loved  him  for  that. 

His  brother  James  must  have  shared  this  quality  with 
him,  since  he  shared  the  title  given  by  the  Lord.  We 
know  less  about  James  than  we  do  about  John,  but  we 
know  that  he  was  the  first  of  the  twelve  apostles  to  be 
martyred,'*^  and  we  know  that  that  martyrdom  pleased 
the  Jews.  Why  was  that  ?  Was  it  because  his  courage  and 
his  boldness  had  made  him  particularly  conspicuous  at  this 
time  and  therefore  particularly  obnoxious  to  all  the  enemies 
of  the  Christian  faith?    Were  they  glad  to  have  him  put 

"  Acts  12.2. 


50  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

out  of  the  way  first  of  all,  because  he  seemed  to  them  to 
be  the  worst  of  all?  Then  it  is  one  of  the  strange  and 
inscrutable  providences  of  God  which  permitted  the  one 
brother  to  be  taken  as  the  first  victim  of  persecution  among 
the  apostles  and  then  allowed  all  the  other  apostles  to 
follow  him  on  that  glorious  roll  of  the  martyrs,  while  the 
other  brother,  who  was  just  as  much  of  a  Boanerges  as  he, 
should  survive  him  and  all  the  rest  and  at  last  die  a  natural 
and  peaceful  death. 

James  and  John  were  alike  in  their  holy  boldness  and 
high  resolution.  Take  that  request  for  the  chief  places  in 
the  kingdom.  We  saw  in  it  an  exhibition  of  selfishness, 
but  there  is  an  element  of  heroism  in  it  as  well.  The  Lord 
had  just  been  telling  them  about  his  coming  condemnation, 
suffering,  and  death.  They  may  not  have  understood  it 
all,  but  they  could  not  have  misunderstood  it  all.  They 
knew  that  there  was  a  cup  for  him  to  drink,  and,  whatever 
it  might  be,  they  were  resolved  to  drink  it  with  him.  When 
he  put  that  test  question  to  them  they  did  not  flinch.  With- 
out a  moment's  hesitation  they  told  him  that  they  had  made 
up  their  minds  on  that  matter  and  they  were  ready  to  suffer 
anything  with  him. 

There  may  have  been  immense  egotism  in  it,  but  there 
was  immense  loyalty  as  well.  There  may  have  been  selfish 
ambition  in  it,  but  there  was  sublime  faith  as  well.  They 
did  not  know  what  the  Lord's  Passion  would  be,  but,  what- 
ever it  was,  they  were  sure  that  there  was  a  glory  beyond 
it,  and  it  was  in  that  glory  they  desired  to  have  a  share. 
Whatever  of  portent  there  might  be  in  the  present  and 
whatever  of  disaster  might  loom  in  the  immediate  future, 
they  had  faith  to  believe  in  the  ultimate  triumph  of  his 
cause.  As  one  writer  has  said,  "It  is  like  the  buying  of 
land  at  full  price  in  Rome  when  the  city  was  in  the  power 
of  an  enemy. "48     It  takes  faith  to  do  that,  and  faith  of  a 


«  Culross,  John,  Whom  Jesus  Loved,  p.  21. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  51 

heroic  quality.  It  was  the  faith  of  a  Boanerges — ardent, 
vehement,  uncalculating,  and  subUme.  James  and  John  did 
not  need  to  take  counsel  with  their  brethren  at  that  point. 
They  were  able  and  willing  to  stand  alone.  They  had  come 
to  positive  convictions  and  they  were  ready  to  risk  all  in 
their  behalf. 

A  Boanerges  is  a  man  with  positive  convictions,  a  man 
of  courage,  constancy,  and  firmness,  a  man  who  will  be 
true  to  his  convictions  without  failing  and  without  flinch- 
ing. He  will  call  things  by  their  right  names  and  he  never 
will  compromise  on  any  harmless  euphemisms.  To  him 
compromise  always  will  seem  to  be  born  of  cowardice. 
The  practical  politician  always  is  studying  expediency. 
The  Boanerges  studies  only  to  know  the  right  and  to  hit 
the  wrong  as  hard  as  he  can  with  his  tongue  and  his  pen 
and  his  fists.  He  never  winks  at  sin,  but  faces  it  boldly 
and  strikes  it  everlastingly  full  in  the  front  with  his  hardest 
and  straightest  blows.  He  would  rather  be  right  than  be 
comfortable.  He  would  rather  stand  alone  than  go  with 
the  multitude  to  do  evil.  He  desires  to  be  righteous  with- 
out respect  to  any  other  consideration.  He  is  willing  to 
be  singular  and  odd  and  unlike  the  great  majority  of  his 
fellows,  but  he  is  not  willing  to  be  mildly  inoffensive  in 
the  face  of  any  wrong.  He  will  make  things  unpleasant 
for  wrongdoers  by  what  he  says  and  by  what  he  does, 
and  they  are  likely  to  call  him  idealistic  and  unpractical, 
and  they  are  apt  to  decide  that  he  is  an  undesirable  citizen. 
If  he  would  only  compromise  a  little  they  could  get  along 
with  him,  but  there  is  no  compromise  in  him,  and  that 
makes  him  simply  impossible. 

Jesus  loved  John  because  he  was  a  Boanerges.  John  was 
not  very  popular  with  other  people  because  he  was  a  Bo- 
anerges. Sometimes  a  man  who  is  reprobated  by  the 
world  is  a  man  after  God's  own  heart.  Sometimes  the 
man  who  is  crucified  by  the  world  is  God's  beloved  Son. 
Sometimes  it  happens  that  the  man  who  is  not  the  most 


52  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

pleasant  associate  here  upon  the  earth  is  the  man  whom 
Jesus  most  loves.  A  Boanerges  is  more  than  likely  to 
disturb  the  peace.  He  is  an  admirable  figure  when  he 
belongs  to  another  generation,  but  he  is  not  so  comfortable 
when  he  is  close  at  hand.  Those  who  do  not  like  to  have 
present  conditions  disturbed  do  not  care  to  have  a  Boaner- 
ges around.  He  is  apt  to  say  things  which  are  disconcert- 
ing. He  is  sure  to  call  a  spade  a  spade.  He  may  give  some 
very  bad  names  to  people  who  would  like  to  think  that 
they  are  at  least  halfway  respectable.  A  man  like  John 
the  apostle  has  no  patience  with  halfway  respectability. 
He  is  absolutely  mtolerant  of  evil  in  every  form  and  in 
every  degree.  He  has  such  a  love  for  the  truth  that  he 
fairly  hates  a  lie.  He  is  incapable  of  any  compromise  with 
falsehood  or  any  truce  with  sin.  There  was  no  looseness 
nor  laxity  nor  false  liberality  with  him.  John  Duncan  once 
said:  "We  are  not  intolerant  enough.  Our  very  calling 
is  to  be  intolerant,  intolerant  of  proved  error  and  known 
sin.  A  man  must,  however,  have  a  clear  eye  and  a  large 
heart  before  he  has  a  right  to  be  intolerant,  either  toward 
concrete  error  or  concrete  sin." 

John  the  apostle  was  such  a  man.  He  had  the  clear  eye 
and  the  large  heart.  He  had  intense  convictions  and  he 
was  capable  of  the  most  intense  moral  indignation.  A 
contemplative  man,  he  brooded,  and  then  he  blazed;  he 
thought,  and  then  he  thundered.  He  was  not  talking  all  the 
time,  but  when  he  did  speak  his  words  often  came  like  a  clap 
of  thunder  from  a  clear  sky.  See  how  that  is  apparent  in 
his  writings.  He  hurls  truth  at  us  abruptly,  like  a  thunder- 
bolt. We  open  the  fourth  Gospel  and  the  first  sentence 
reads,  "In  the  beginning  was  the  Logos,  and  the  Logos 
was  with  God,  and  the  Logos  was  God."  Chrysostom  says, 
"Hear  how  he  thunders !"  Augustine  says,  "John  has 
opened  his  words,  as  it  were,  with  a  burst  of  thunder !" 
Bengel  says,  "This  is  the  thunder  brought  down  to  us  by 
a  son  of  thunder !"     Frequently  there  is  something  of  the 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  53 

suddenness  and  the  unexpectedness  of  a  thunderclap  in 
the  style  of  John. 

He  is  a  son  of  thunder  again  in  his  denunciations  of  all 
sinners  and  sin.  He  has  no  excuses  to  make  for  wrongdo- 
ing. He  does  not  equivocate  in  his  terms  describing  it.  No- 
where else  in  the  New  Testament,  not  even  in  the  words  of 
Jesus  himself,  do  we  find  more  irreconcilable  antagonism 
to  evil.  To  him  Judas  is  a  devil  and  the  son  of  perdition.^^ 
The  Jews  are  the  children  of  the  devil. ^^  Every  professing 
Christian  who  walks  in  the  darkness  is  a  liar,  and  he  makes 
God  a  liar.^i  The  antichrist  is  a  liar.^^  Every  sinner  is 
a  child  of  the  devil. ^-^  Whosoever  hateth  his  brother  is 
a  murderer.^'*  False  teachers  are  to  have  no  lodging  in 
their  homes  and  no  greeting  in  their  streets. ^^  This  is  the 
spirit  of  a  Boanerges — vehement,  irreconcilable,  uncom- 
promising, intense  in  conviction  and  intense  in  denuncia- 
tion, a  face  like  flint,  a  backbone  inflexible,  straightforward 
in  dealing,  handling  all  subjects  and  all  people  without 
gloves,  calling  things  by  their  right  names,  demanding  con- 
tinuous righteousness  of  life,  and  fearlessly  faithful  to  the 
truth  as  he  saw  it  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  his 
days.  "It  is  not  surprising,"  says  Dean  Stanley,  "that  the 
deep  stillness  of  such  a  character  should,  like  the  Oriental 
sky,  break  out  from  time  to  time  into  tempests  of  impas- 
sioned vehemence;  still  less  that  the  character  which  was 
to  excel  all  others  in  its  devoted  love  of  good  should  give 
indications — in  its  earlier  stages  even  in  excess — of  that 
intense  hatred  of  evil  without  which  love  of  good  can 
hardly  be  said  to  exist. "^^ 

Were  the  Samaritans  unfriendly  to  the  Master  he  loved? 
Then   let   fire   from   heaven   fall   upon   their   inhospitable 


<9  John  6.  70;  17.  12.  ''i  John  3.  8,  10. 

60  John  8.  44.  "I  John  3.  15. 

"  I  John  I.  6,  10.  66  2  John  10.  11. 

62  I  John  2.  22. 

66  Stanley,  Sermons  and  Essays  on  the  Apostolic  Age,  p.  250, 


54  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

homes  and  consume  them.^'^  Did  any  man  use  the  name 
of  Jesus  and  refuse  to  follow  him?  Then  let  an  injunction 
be  served  upon  him  and  let  him  be  put  out  of  business  at 
once.^^  That  was  the  spirit  of  a  Boanerges  manifest  in 
John's  early  life.  It  was  a  little  too  intolerant  then,  and 
it  needed  to  be  corrected  by  Christ ;  but  John  never  lost  the 
Boanerges  spirit,  and  Jesus  never  desired  that  he  should. 
He  was  the  boldest  of  the  twelve  at  the  time  of  the  cruci- 
fixion. He  was  the  first  to  recover  from  the  panic  of  the 
Gethsemane  garden.  He  was  the  one  man  among  all  of 
the  followers  of  Jesus  who  seems  to  have  been  near  him  at 
the  trial  in  the  high  priest's  palace  and  nearest  him  during 
the  last  hours  on  the  cross.  He  was  the  first  of  them  at 
the  empty  tomb  on  the  morning  of  the  Easter  day,  and  he 
was  the  first  to  attain  to  the  resurrection  faith. 

Did  the  enemies  of  the  cross  gather  themselves  together 
against  the  Lord  and  his  Anointed  and  seem  ready  to 
celebrate  their  triumph  over  the  Christian  Church?  Then 
let  a  book  be  written,  an  Apocalypse,  full  of  thunders  and 
lightnings,  full  of  war  and  famine  and  pestilence  and 
plague,  full  of  the  denunciation  of  sin  and  a  sublime  faith 
in  the  ultimate  victory  of  the  Lamb,  a  book  to  be  like  a 
bugle  call  to  high  endeavor  to  all  the  future  generations  of 
the  church,  a  book  to  be  a  perfect  tonic  of  inspiration  to 
every  sturdily  striving  saint,  a  book  to  be  a  Boanerges  in 
print!    John  was  the  man  of  all  men  to  write  such  a  book. 

Was  Cerinthus,  the  enemy  of  the  truth,  in  the  bathhouse 
at  Ephesus?  Then  John  will  not  bathe  there;  the  water 
will  be  polluted  by  the  heretic's  presence,  and  the  house 
ought  to  fall  down  on  his  head.  Had  the  bishop  there  at 
Smyrna  allowed  the  neophyte  committed  to  his  charge  to 
backslide  and  become  the  leader  of  the  mountain  banditti  ? 
Then  let  him  be  denounced  publicly,  and  humiliated  before 
all  the  people.     "It  was  a  fine  guard  of  a  brother's  soul  I 

"  Luke  9.  54. 
■*  Luke  9.  49. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  55 

left!"  A  Boanerges  spake  in  that  tone  of  cutting  irony. 
The  spirit  of  a  Boanerges  did  not  die  out  in  the  old  age  of 
John,  We  find  it  in  the  fourth  Gospel  and  in  the  epistles, 
those  writings  of  the  apostle's  last  days. 

Can  we  summarize  what  we  have  been  saying  in  a  few 
short  sentences?  i.  John  was  not  a  Boanerges  because  of  • 
his  loud  voice.  2.  He  was  not  a  Boanerges  because  he  was 
a  disciple  of  John  the  Baptist.  3.  He  was  a  Boanerges 
because  of  his  own  character.  4.  Those  qualities  of  charac- 
ter which  gave  him  this  title  may  be  suggested  by  his  in- 
tensity of  conviction,  his  singleness  of  soul-devotion,  his 
loyalty  of  love,  his  hatred  of  sin,  manifest  in  his  action 
and  in  his  speech  and  in  his  writings  as  well.  These  things 
made  John  a  Boanerges.  Jesus  loved  John  because  he 
was  a  Boanerges.  That  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved  most 
of  all  had  in  him  these  qualities  of  a  Boanerges. 

VI.    John  the  Saint  and  Seer 

How  about  all  of  this?  We  thought  John  was  a  saint. 
We  thought  he  was  a  holy  man.  We  had  thought  that  he 
was  rather  maidenish  in  disposition,  of  the  feminine  if  not 
the  effeminate  type.  We  begin  to  see  that  that  must  be  a 
mistaken  conception,  and  that  the  facts  are  far  from  war- 
ranting it.  John  must  have  been  a  man,  and  a  man  of  the 
heroic  type,  but  he  was  a  saint ;  and  saintliness  is  inconsist- 
ent with  a  ruffled  temper  and  with  vehement  language.  A 
saint  never  must  get  angry  and  say  and  do  violent  things. 
Is  that  true?  Perhaps  we  are  mistaken  in  that  conception 
too.  What  does  Paul  mean  by  giving  us  the  command, 
"Be  ye  angry"  ?^9  We  thought  that  we  were  to  be  meek 
and  lowly  in  spirit  like  our  Lord.  We  thought  that  if  we 
were  saints,  or  anything  like  what  we  ought  to  be,  we  would 
be  long-suffering  and  forbearing  in  love  like  the  Master. 

Can  we  imagine  Jesus  being  angry  with  anyone?     Did 

«•  Eph.  4.  26. 


56  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

he  ever  thunder  out  in  angry  tones  his  denunciation  of 
sinners  and  their  sins?  Yes,  he  did.  In  one  place  we  are 
told  in  so  many  words  that  he  "looked  round  about  on 
them  with  anger."^*^  In  other  passages  we  read  that  his 
anger  expressed  itself  in  his  tones.^^  He  used  the  same 
tones  Judas  used  when  he  became  angry  with  Mary  for 
wasting  so  much  good  ointment,  representing  so  much  good 
money  thrown  away.  The  verb  in  the  Greek  is  the  same, 
applied  to  Jesus  and  applied  to  Judas.  Then,  how  about 
the  scourge  of  small  thongs  with  which  he  drove  out  of 
the  temple  the  sellers  of  merchandise,  and  how  about  the 
overturning  of  the  tables  of  the  money-changers?  That 
must  have  been  quite  a  scene.  That  must  have  been  far 
from  being  a  quiet  scene.  There  must  have  been  violence 
and  commotion,  loud  remonstrance  and  threatening  of  hand 
and  tongue.  Such  things  cannot  be  done  gently.  There 
was  the  rushing  together  of  the  multitude.  There  was 
clamor  and  confusion.  With  flashing  eye  and  ringing  tones 
Jesus  mastered  the  mob  and  carried  everything  by  storm. 
Their  traffic  was  duly  licensed  by  the  authorities,  but  Jesus 
undertook  to  prohibit  it  at  that  time  and  place.^^  John  saw 
it  all  and  rejoiced  in  it.  All  the  Boanerges  spirit  in  him 
was  stirred,  and  he  said,  "This  is  the  Master  for  me." 

Then  how  about  that  denunciation  of  the  scribes  and  the 
Pharisees  as  fools  and  hypocrites  and  blind  ?  "Ye  serpents, 
ye  offspring  of  vipers,  how  shall  ye  escape  the  judgment  of 
hell  ?"^^  In  all  literature,  sacred  and  profane,  you  cannot 
find  words  which  cut  and  hiss  and  burn  like  the  words  of 
that  invective.  John  heard  them,  and  all  the  Boanerges 
spirit  in  him  was  stirred  by  them;  and  he  said  again  at 
the  close  of  Christ's  ministry  as  he  had  at  the  beginning, 
"This  is  the  Master  for  me."  Jesus  was  the  Sinless  One. 
Jesus  was  perfectly  holy  in  conduct  and  speech.  Yet  in 
his  life  there  were  occasions  for  such  outbursts  of  indigna- 

«"  Mark  3.  5.  62  John  2.  13-22. 

*i  Matt.  9.  30;  Mark  i.  43.  ^  Matt.  23.  13-33, 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  57 

tion  and  anger  as  these.  If  need  be,  we  must  change  our 
conception  of  saintHness  to  make  it  consistent  with  such 
experiences  and  with  such  scenes. 

That  gentle  Jesus  of  the  Hly  white  hands  and  the  seam- 
less and  spotless  white  robe  and  with  the  aureole  always 
encircling  his  head  is  not  to  be  found  anywhere  in  our 
Gospels.  He  is  a  pure  invention  of  the  artists  and  the 
sentimentalists.  The  real  Jesus  was  a  man  whose  eyes 
could  flash  with  indignation  and  whose  tones  could  tremble 
with  wrath  upon  occasion;  and  any  man  who  is  Christlike 
will  be  capable  of  these  things.  If  gross  injustice  does  not 
arouse  deliberate  anger  within  him,  he  has  not  the  spirit 
of  the  Christ. 

Anger  is  a  duty  sometimes.  "Anger  at  what  is  wrong, 
at  men  who  are  false,  ungodly,  cruel,  is  Godlike,  for  his 
wrath  comes  on  the  children  of  disobedience ;  and  Christ- 
like, for  he  looked  upon  hardhearted  hypocrites  with  anger ; 
and  a  character  incapable  of  such  feeling  would  not  be  the 
Christian  ideal. "^*  It  is  all  right  to  be  angry  on  certain 
occasions.  The  apostle  Paul  commands  us,  "Be  ye  angry !" 
and  he  said  upon  another  occasion,  "Have  this  mind  in  you, 
which  was  also  in  Christ  Jesus,"*"'^  and  there  is  no  inherent 
inconsistency  in  the  two  exhortations.  He  who  has  the 
mind  of  Christ  will  be  angry  sometimes.  The  saintliness 
incapable  of  most  intense  indignation  and  righteous  anger 
has  degenerated  into  softness  and  flabbiness.  Resentment 
under  just  provocation,  sudden  anger  in  the  face  of  gross 
injustice,  is  natural  and  inevitable  in  any  strong  character ; 
and  it  is  sanctioned  in  our  New  Testament  and  it  is  right 
in  itself.  Any  good  man  does  well  to  be  angry  when  he 
sees  the  innocent  suffer  and  any  outrageous  triumph  of  evil. 

Of  course  there  is  much  to  be  said  on  the  other  side. 
There  is  an  anger  which  is  sinful  and  Satanic.  We  are 
not  talking  about  that  now.     We  are  talking  about  anger 

"  Candlish,  Commentary  on  Ephesians,  p.  lOI. 
"Eph.  4.  26;  Phil.  2.  5. 


58  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

which  is  godlike,  the  anger  of  our  Lord  and  Master,  the 
anger  of  the  Boanerges  whom  Jesus  loved.  We  are  con- 
cerned to  show  that  it  is  wholly  consistent  with  a  saintly, 
holy  life.  Godlike  anger  has  its  root  in  love.  God  so  loved 
the  world  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son  for  the  very 
sinners  against  whom  his  wrath  had  been  displayed.  Jesus 
looked  around  upon  that  synagogue  company  with  anger, 
being  grieved  at  the  hardening  of  their  hearts.  He  pitied 
them  and  loved  them,  even  while  he  was  angry  with  them 
for  their  stubborn  hypocrisy.  The  anger  of  the  Father  and 
of  the  Son  served  the  purposes  of  their  love.  It  will  last 
only  until  that  end  is  reached. 

Chrysostom  said :  "We  have  anger  given  us,  not  that  we 
may  commit  violence  upon  our  neighbors,  but  that  we  may 
correct  those  who  are  in  sin.  .  .  .  Anger  is  implanted  in 
us  as  a  sort  of  sting,  to  make  us  gnash  with  our  teeth 
against  the  devil,  to  make  us  vehement  against  him."^^ 
Righteous  anger  is  anger  against  sin.  It  springs  from  love, 
and  it  aims  at  others'  good.  A  man  may  be  a  Boanerges 
and  call  his  neighbors  the  children  of  the  devil  and  fools 
and  hypocrites  and  snakes  and  the  offspring  of  snakes,  and 
still  be  a  saint.  We  know  that  is  true  because  Jesus  did 
just  those  things.  John  was  like  Jesus.  He  was  a  Boaner- 
ges, intolerant  of  sin  and  denouncing  sinners  in  thunder 
tones  when  occasion  required ;  and  we  cannot  impugn  his 
sainthood  upon  these  grounds.  So  we  put  down  these  two 
characteristics  of  the  apostle  John  side  by  side,  paradoxical 
though  they  may  seem  to  some  people.  John  was  a  Bo- 
anerges, and  John  was  a  saint, 

I.  He  was  the  holiest  man  among  the  twelve  apostles. 
He  had  a  passion  for  purity.  He  was  called  in  the  early 
church 'O  Ilap^evof,  "the  Virgin,"  for  the  tradition  was  that 
he  never  had  married  and  that  his  personal  purity  from  his 


•*  Homilies  on  Ephesians,  II.    Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  vol. 
xiii,  p.  58. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  59 

youth  up  had  attracted  the  greater  love  of  Jesus  to  him. 
Polycrates,  who  was  Bishop  of  Ephesus  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  second  century,  wrote  to  Victor  at  Rome  that  John 
was  a  priest  of  priestly  descent  and  that  in  his  old  age  in 
Ephesus  he  wore  a  golden  plate  fastened  on  his  forehead 
which  bore  the  inscription,  "Holiness  unto  the  Lord."  If 
that  is  a  legend,  it  is  a  legend  true  to  life.  The  aged  apostle 
walked  before  the  Lord  in  the  beauty  of  holiness,  and  holi- 
ness had  written  its  seal  on  his  brow,  his  body,  his  spirit, 
his  whole  personality. 

2.  There  was  one  characteristic  of  sainthood  which  John 
seems  to  have  possessed  in  full  measure — the  spirit  of  self- 
effacement  as  far  as  that  might  be  allowable  or  possible. 
He  seems  to  have  been  utterly  void  of  the  modern  spirit 
of  self-advertising.  He  never  willingly  thrust  himself  to  the 
front.  He  was  content  always  with  a  secondary  or  subordi- 
nate position.  Somebody  else  might  stand  in  the  limelight; 
John  preferred  to  stand  in  the  shade.  When  the  time  came 
for  him  to  be  active  he  was  ready  to  assume  responsibility ; 
but  as  long  as  anyone  else  was  present  to  take  the  initiative 
John  was  content  to  allow  him  to  lead. 

This  is  apparent  throughout  the  record  of  the  Gospels, 
where  John  always  is  mentioned  in  connection  with  others 
who  are  more  prominent  than  he.  Only  once  in  the  four 
Gospels  is  he  mentioned  alone.  It  is  apparent  in  his  own 
writings,  where  his  extreme  reticence  becomes  character- 
istic throughout.  His  mother  and  his  brother  never  are 
mentioned  by  name,  and  he  hides  himself  behind  a  descrip- 
tive phrase.  It  is  apparent  again  in  the  history  of  the  early 
church.  We  read  there  that  parties  were  formed,  some 
declaring  that  they  were  of  Paul,  and  some  of  Apollos,  and 
some  of  Cephas,  and  some  of  Christ;  but  we  never  hear 
of  any  party  in  that  beginning  history  of  the  church  declar- 
ing itself  to  be  of  John.  He  was  a  naturally  modest  man, 
of  a  retiring  disposition.  It  was  only  when  all  the  other 
apostles  had  died  that  he  came  to  his  primacy  in  the  church. 


6o  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Even  then  he  bore  himself  with  simple  dignity  and  was 
unassuming  in  conduct  and  speech. 

An  admirer  of  Dr.  Dollinger  wrote  of  him:  "It  may  be 
doubted  whether  there  ever  was  a  man  who  in  a  greater 
degree  combined  such  amazing  powers  with  such  beautiful 
simplicity.  He  had  received  almost  every  honor  which 
the  state  or  the  university  could  bestow  upon  him;  he  was 
the  friend  of  princes  and  the  confidant  of  statesmen;  he 
was  possessed  of  information  which  would  have  made  a 
score  of  men  intellectually  rich:  and  throughout  it  all  he 
had  the  simplicity  of  a  child."®'^  We  may  well  believe  that 
this  description  would  apply  to  the  old  age  of  John.  He 
was  honored  above  all  other  living  men  in  the  Christian 
Church,  but  he  was  unaffected,  unassuming,  simple  and  un- 
selfish as  a  little  child.  Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
Such  the  saints  always  have  been. 

John  was  the  very  opposite  of  the  man  who  is  forever 
talking  about  himself,  vaunting  his  own  deeds,  and  blowing 
his  own  trumpet.  Some  men  put  in  so  much  time  doing 
that  that  there  is  no  time  left  for  making  their  promises 
good.  They  are  first-class  in  advertising  but  third-rate  in 
performance.  John  omitted  all  advertising.  He  had 
neither  time  nor  inclination  for  boasting.  He  was  meek 
and  lowly  in  spirit  like  his  Lord.  He  was  content  to  be 
the  least  among  his  brethren  on  earth,  and  he  became  the 
greatest  in  the  Master's  love  and  the  church's  reverence 
and  regard.  The  Master  realized  his  worth  in  the  begin- 
ning, but  it  took  the  church  a  generation  or  two  to  come 
to  the  consciousness  of  it.  He  humbled  himself  so  persist- 
ently and  so  effectually  that  the  church  was  prone  to  ap- 
praise him  at  his  own  modest  rating.  It  awoke  at  last  to 
the  fact  that  Jesus  had  known  better  than  other  men  the 
incomparable  exaltation  of  this  apostle's  spiritual  percep- 
tion and  the  kinship  of  his  character  with  the  Divine. 


«^  Pr.  Plummer,  Expositor,  Fourth  Series,  vol.  i,  p.  214. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  6i 

Is  this  reticence  and  modesty  inconsistent  with  the  spirit 
of  a  Boanerges?  No,  it  is  just  the  thing  which  makes  the 
Boanerges  outburst  most  terrible.  It  is  the  quiet  man,  who 
has  thought  much  before  he  speaks,  whose  words  are  most 
impressive  when  at  last  his  silence  is  broken.  It  is  the 
self-restrained  but  ardent  nature  which  is  capable  of  rising 
at  times  into  the  majesty  and  strength  of  a  tidal  wave.  A 
Boanerges  is  not  a  bull  of  Bashan,  bellowing  all  the  time. 
A  Boanerges  is  more  like  a  Mount  vEtna,  which  lies  for 
long  periods  in  perfect  peace,  but  is  capable  at  intervals  of 
an  eruption  with  elemental  force. 

Is  this  modesty  and  reticence  of  John's  character  incon- 
sistent with  the  request  made  by  James  and  himself  for 
the  chief  places  in  the  kingdom?  No,  for  that  request  evi- 
dently was  made  with  the  knowledge  that  they  must  prove 
themselves  worthy  of  the  coveted  honor  by  meeting  all  the 
conditions  of  its  bestowment ;  and  James  and  John  were 
ready  to  meet  those  conditions,  no  matter  what  self-sacri- 
fice and  self-abasement  they  might  entail.  The  ten  were 
moved  with  indignation  concerning  the  two  brethren  who 
had  seemed  to  be  selfishly  ambitious  and  desirous  of  gain- 
ing a  secret  advantage  in  a  promise  of  preference  over  the 
rest.  They  were  inclined  to  think  that  James  and  John 
were  disposed  to  regard  themselves  as  aristocrats  anyway ; 
and,  naturally  enough,  they  resented  any  effort  on  their 
part  to  insure  their  preeminence  in  the  glories  which  lay 
before. 

Then  Jesus  called  the  ten  to  him  and  explained  that  the 
rulers  of  the  Gentiles  lord  it  over  them,  and  their  great 
ones  exercise  authority  over  them,  but  he  had  given  James 
and  John  to  understand  that  it  was  not  to  be  so  with 
Christians.  If  they  desired  to  be  great  among  their  breth- 
ren, they  must  prove  themselves  of  the  greatest  service  to 
their  brethren.  If  they  desired  to  be  first  among  the 
apostles,  they  must  minister  to  all  the  rest  and  be  the  serv- 
ants of  all.    This  was  the  condition  of  preeminence  in  the 


62  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Christian  Church,  an^ utter  self-abnegation  unto  any  extent 
of  sacrifice  and  service.  He  had  offered  them  this  cup  to 
drink;  and  they  had  been  willing  to  drain  it  to  the  bitter 
dregs.  Anyone  who  desired  might  drink  of  this  cup,  and 
it  ought  to  arouse  admiration  and  not  indignation,  love  and 
not  jealousy  or  hate  in  all  who  would  be  benefited  by  such 
uttermost  consecration  to  the  general  good.  With  that 
explanation  the  ten  were  satisfied.  Their  indignation  cooled 
before  the  challenge  of  James  and  John  and  Jesus  to  the 
exhibition  of  like  humility  in  service  and  sacrifice  and  suf- 
fering. 

With  this  understanding  on  the  part  of  James  and  John 
of  the  program  of  Christianity  and  the  part  they  must  play 
to  achieve  any  greatness  in  the  kingdom  their  request  be- 
comes a  proof  of  their  ardent  desire  to  be  as  unselfish  as 
Jesus  himself  had  been.  Jesus  made  it  so  plain  that  they 
could  not  misunderstand,  and  they  did  not  withdraw  their 
request.  They  said:  "We  are  able  to  meet  this  condition, 
to  drink  this  cup;  and  if  this  is  the  way  to  greatness,  O 
Lord,  we  are  your  men.  With  your  blessing  we  will  go 
this  way,  to  the  cross  and  to  the  throne." 

It  was  the  character  of  Jesus  himself  which  had  capti- 
vated John.  It  was  in  his  Kingdom  that  he  hoped  to 
rank  high.  He  would  be  like  Jesus,  and  so  worthy  to  sit 
with  him  on  his  throne.  His  throne  mate  must  be  a  mate 
of  his  spirit  as  well.  John  knew  that,  and  to  be  that  was 
the  chief  desire  of  his  heart. 

3.  John  was  a  man  with  a  large  bump  of  reverence. 
Strong  personalities  had  an  attraction  for  him.  Irresistibly 
he  was  drawn  to  them,  and  unhesitatingly  he  gave  them 
his  reverence  and  his  love.  Professor  William  Milligan 
has  said,  "Perhaps  the  most  marked  characteristic  of  the 
apostle  John  was  his  receptivity  of  disposition,  his  open- 
ness of  heart  for  all  that  was  true  and  beautiful  and  holy, 
and  the  delight  with  which  he  dwelt  upon  it  in  the  inmost 
depths  of  his  own  soul,  till  it  penetrated  and  formed  his 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  63 

whole  nature  to  a  likeness  with  itself."^^  When  John  the 
Baptist  began  to  preach,  John  the  fisherman  forsook  his 
nets  and  his  home  and  went  down  to  the  Jordan  to  hear 
him.  He  was  soon  convinced  that  the  Baptist  was  a  great 
personality,  the  reviver  of  the  ancient  spirit  of  prophecy 
and  the  forerunner  of  the  better  things  to  come.  He  be- 
came his  loyal  disciple ;  for  the  Baptist  was  a  genius  and 
the  greatest  man  the  fisher  lad  ever  had  seen  or  known. 
When  he  had  passed  from  the  discipleship  of  John  to  the 
discipleship  of  Jesus,  in  the  apostolic  company  he  was 
attracted  most  by  Peter.  Peter  was  the  strongest  character 
aside  from  his  own  to  be  found  among  the  twelve.  John 
attached  himself  to  him,  and  they  became  inseparable  com- 
panions in  the  itinerant  ministry  of  the  following  years. 

Disciple  of  John  the  Baptist  and  friend  of  Peter,  John 
became  the  devoted  lover  of  the  Lord  as  soon  as  Jesus  had 
appeared  within  his  horizon.  Even  as  Jesus  excelled  John 
the  Baptist  and  Peter  and  all  other  men,  John's  love  for 
Jesus  excelled  all  other  love.  He  had  been  the  loyal  disciple 
of  John  the  Baptist,  he  always  was  the  faithful  friend  of 
Peter;  but  all  the  fervent  affection  of  his  young  heart  was 
poured  out  at  the  feet  of  Jesus,  and  all  the  ardor  of  a 
Boanerges  was  concentrated  in  the  devotion  of  his  life  to 
him.  John  reverenced  Jesus  as  no  one  of  the  other  apostles 
did.  John  loved  Jesus  as  he  had  loved  no  other  soul  on 
earth.    He  became  that  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved. 

4.  To  John  himself  this  seemed  to  be  his  chief  distinc- 
tion; he  had  loved  Jesus  and  Jesus  had  loved  him.  In  the 
fourth  Gospel  he  calls  himself  by  that  title,  "The  disciple 
whom  Jesus  loved."^^  It  does  not  appear  in  any  of  our 
Gospels  that  anyone  else  ever  called  John  by  this  name. 
He  assumes  it,  because  he  deserved  it.  It  belonged  to  him 
by  right  of  conquest.  He  had  achieved  the  place  nearest 
the  heart  of  the  Incarnate  One.     That  was  the  greatest 

•8  Expositor,  Third  Series,  vol.  x,  p.  337, 
•"John  20.  2;  21.  7,  20. 


64  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

honor  he  ever  had  had  or  ever  could  have.  Abraham  had 
been  called  the  friend  of  God.  David  was  said  to  be  a 
man  after  God's  own  heart.  Daniel  was  recorded  in  the 
Scripture  as  the  one  loved  of  God.  Now  John  had  been 
admitted  into  this  glorious  fellowship.  Jesus  had  shown 
by  his  manner  and  preference  that  John  was  a  man  after 
his  own  heart.  John  had  been  the  friend  of  Jesus,  and 
loved  of  Jesus,  and  that  had  been  the  unparalleled  privilege 
of  his  life.  Jesus  had  called  John  a  Boanerges,  and  that 
title  belonged  to  him  by  right ;  but  to  John  this  was  a  better 
title,  and  it  belonged  to  him  by  right ;  and  so  he  wrote  him- 
self down  for  all  time  to  come  as  the  one  who  had  enjoyed 
the  distinction  of  being  "the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved." 

Was  that  inconsistent  with  his  modesty  ?  Of  course  not ; 
it  was  the  simple  statement  of  the  truth  of  the  case. 
Modesty  never  is  inconsistent  with  truthfulness.  In  all 
humility  and  in  all  gratitude  John  could  modestly,  truth- 
fully say,  "He  loved  me,  and  he  loved  me  most."  It  was 
not  a  thing  to  boast  about.  If  John  ever  had  fallen  to 
boasting  of  his  intimate  relations  with  Jesus,  he  would 
have  forfeited  all  right  to  those  relations  at  once.  Love 
vaunteth  not  itself,  and  that  is  one  reason  why  it  is  beloved. 
A  braggart  never  could  have  been  a  bosom  companion  with 
Jesus.  However,  that  closest  companionship  with  Jesus 
was  a  thing  to  be  cherished  in  memory  and  humbly  and 
gratefully  to  be  acknowledged  as  a  man's  highest  honor 
and  God's  greatest  gift. 

John  was  the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved  because  he  was 
a  Boanerges,  and  because  he  was  a  saint,  and  because  he  was 
modest  and  meek,  and  because  he  had  an  inherent  rever- 
ence for  genius  and  for  goodness.  Jesus  loved  John  for 
all  these  elements  in  his  character,  but  the  chief  reason  for 
his  love  was  that  John  loved  him  with  a  love  surpassing 
that  of  women.  Love  begets  love.  That  disciple  whom 
Jesus  loved  loved  Jesus  more  than  any  other  disciple  did. 
He  had  a  personal  affection  for  the  man  Jesus.     There 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  65 

was  a  bond  of  personal  affinity  between  these  two.  Alex- 
ander the  Great  had  two  friends.  Plutarch  called  one  of 
them  Philo-Basileus,  the  friend  of  the  king;  and  he  called 
the  other  one  Philo-Alexandros,  the  friend  of  Alexander. 
There  was  a  difference  between  friendship  for  the  monarch 
and  friendship  for  the  man.  So  Grotius  calls  Peter  Philo- 
Christos,  the  friend  of  Christ,  and  John  Philo- Jesus,  the 
friend  of  Jesus.  We  doubt  whether  it  is  quite  fair  to  Peter 
to  make  such  a  distinction;  but  there  can  be  no  question 
that  the  title  given  to  John  rightfully  belongs  to  him. 

To  the  outside  multitude  Peter  may  have  been  the  best- 
known  of  the  apostles  and  they  may  have  looked  upon 
Peter  as  the  official  representative  of  the  Christ,  the  friend 
of  the  Messias  who  could  answer  for  him  when  occasion 
required,  as  in  the  collection  of  the  temple  tax  ;^«  but  in 
the  inner  circle  everybody  knew  that  John  was  the  closest 
and  dearest  friend  of  Jesus.  He  shared  his  innermost 
thought.  He  knew  his  purposes  and  plans.  He  was  more 
nearly  one  in  spirit  with  Jesus  than  any  other  member  of 
their  band.  Peter  always  was  saying:  "What  shall  I  do? 
Shall  I  build  three  tabernacles  here,  O  Lord?  Shall  I 
smite  off  Malchus's  ear?"  John  always  was  thinking, 
"What  does  Jesus  say?  What  will  Jesus  do?"  His  eye 
always  is  on  Jesus.  In  the  fourth  Gospel  John  himself 
never  is  visible  and  Jesus  never  is  invisible.  Through  the 
whole  book  John's  object  seems  to  be  to  conceal  himself  ^ 
as  far  as  possible  and  to  reveal  Jesus  as  fully  as  possible. 
To  him  Jesus  is  the  fairest  among  ten  thousand  and  the 
one  altogether  lovely;  and  he  would  have  all  men  believe 
in  him  even  as  he  himself  does. 

Jesus  had  no  wife.  He  loved  no  woman  more  than  his 
mother  in  the  Nazareth  home.  Outside  that  home  John 
came  nearest  his  heart.  The  wealth  of  his  affection  was 
given  to  John,  and  John  proved  himself  worthy  of  it  by 

™Matt.  17.  24,  25. 


66  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

returning  it  in  full  measure.    It  was  the  greatest  distinction 
ever  given  to  a  man. 

5.  John  was  a  seer.  In  the  primary  sense  of  the  term 
it  was  true  of  him.  It  may  have  been  because  he  was  the 
youngest  in  the  apostolic  company  that  he  seems  to  have 
been  able  to  see  better  and  to  see  more  than  the  others  did. 
He  calls  himself  "He  that  hath  seen."^^  He  seems  to  have 
been  the  only  one  who  saw  the  water  and  the  blood  flowing 
from  the  Saviour's  side.  When  Peter  and  John  went  run- 
ning together  to  the  empty  tomb  to  see  what  had  become 
of  Jesus,  John  the  younger  outran  Peter  and  came  first  to 
the  tomb  and  stooped  and  looked  in  and  saw  all  that  was 
needed  to  satisfy  him  in  this  matter.  Peter  came  panting 
behind  him  and  never  thought  of  stooping  at  the  entrance 
as  John  had.  His  eyes  would  not  serve  him  there  in  that 
early  morning  dawn.  He  entered  the  tomb  where  he  could 
give  to  these  things  the  closer  inspection  his  older  eyes 
made  necessary  to  him.'^^  When  the  seven  were  out  upon 
the  sea  fishing  and  a  Stranger  appeared  on  the  shore  and 
told  them  where  to  find  fish,  John  strained  his  eyes  through 
the  sea  fog  until  the  intuition  within  him  had  ripened  into 
a  certainty  and  he  turned  to  Peter  and  said,  "It  is  the 
Lord.'"''^  His  heart  had  been  the  first  to  surmise  it.  His 
eye  had  been  the  first  to  assure  it.  Here  are  the  tokens  of 
the  seer  in  the  primary  sense. 

John  saw  with  his  heart  and  with  his  intuitions  as  well 
as  with  his  eyes.  He  saw  deeper  into  the  being  and  per- 
sonality of  Jesus  than  anyone  else.  The  fourth  Gospel 
is  the  proof  of  that  statement.  He  saw  farther  into  the 
future  than  any  other  disciple,  and  discerned  the  whole 
course  of  the  contest  and  glimpsed  the  triumph  of  the  end. 
The  Apocalypse  is  the  proof  of  this.  He  realized  as  no 
one  else  the  deeper  principles  of  the  new  revelation.     He 

"  John  19.  35. 
'2  John  20.  4-6. 
"  John  21.7. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN.  67 

saw  more  clearly  than  the  rest  how  divine  was  the  daily 
life  of  Jesus.  He  was  a  mystic  in  the  best  sense  of  that 
term.  He  does  not  have  much  interest  in  the  outside  of 
things.  He  always  is  endeavoring  to  see  to  their  center  and 
to  take  hold  of  them  from  within.  His  keen  eye  pierces  to 
the  very  heart  of  things  and  he  looks  beyond  the  clouds  to 
where  the  clear  sun  is  shining. 

In  the  ancient  church  the  flying  eagle  was  his  symbol. 
The  eagle  symbolized  inspiration,  aspiration,  exaltation, 
heavenly-mindedness,  and  holiness.  The  eagle  lives  in  the 
heights,  rises  on  tireless  wings  into  the  ether,  soars  above 
the  clouds,  flies  to  the  sun  and  with  open  eye  endures  to 
take  his  glories  in.  So  the  Eagle-Evangelist  rises  to  loftier 
spiritual  heights  than  any  other  writer  in  our  New  Testa- 
ment. His  thought  moves  in  the  heavenly  places.  His 
affections  are  set  on  things  above,  not  on  things  on  the 
earth.  On  tireless  wings  his  ardor  rises  into  the  very 
presence-chamber  of  the  King. 

See  how  the  fourth  Gospel  begins ;  and  compare  its  open- 
ing words  with  those  of  the  synoptics.  Augustine  said: 
"Those  three  evangelists  occupy  themselves  chiefly  with 
the  things  which  Christ  did  in  the  flesh,  and  with  the  pre- 
cepts which  he  delivered  to  men,  who  also  bear  the  burden 
of  the  flesh,  for  their  instruction  in  the  rightful  exercise 
of  this  mortal  life.  Whereas  John,  on  the  other  hand,  soars 
like  an  eagle  above  the  clouds  of  human  infirmity,  and 
gazes  upon  the  light  of  the  unchangeable  truth  with  those 
keenest  and  steadiest  eyes  of  the  heart. "'^**  Adam  of  Saint 
Victor,  the  greatest  poet  of  the  Latin  tongue  in  the  Middle 
Ages,  after  characterizing  the  other  evangelists  says, 

Sed  Johannes,  ala  bina 
Charitatis,  aquilina 
Forma,  fertur  in  divina 
Puriori  lumine. 


">*  Harmony  of  the  Gospels,  I,  6.      Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers, 
vol.  vi,  p.  81. 


68  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

John,  the  eagle's  feature  having, 
Earth  on  love's  twain  pinions  leaving, 
Soars  aloft,  God's  truth  perceiving 
In  light's  purer  atmosphere.^^ 

John  is  indeed  "the  eagle  that  flies  high,  so  right  high 
and  yet  more  high  than  does  any  other  bird,  because  he  is 
feathered  with  fine  love,  and  beholds  above  other  the  beauty 
of  the  Sun,  and  the  beams  and  brightness  of  the  Sun."'^ 

6.  This  leads  us  to  say  next  that  John  is  the  greatest 
theologian  and  the  most  profound  philosopher  of  the  early 
Christian  Church.  The  church  Fathers  rightly  called  him, 
'O  QeoXoyoq,  The  Theologian.  Even  Baur  agrees  with  this 
verdict.  He  says,  speaking  of  the  Johannine  type  of 
thought,  "In  ihm  erreicht  die  neutestamentliche  Theologie 
ihre  hochste  Stufe  und  ihre  vollendetste  Form" — "In  it  the 
New  Testament  theology  reaches  its  highest  plane  and  its 
most  perfect  form."  A  more  recent  authority  concludes, 
"In  the  writings  ascribed  to  John  there  is  more  of  a  com- 
plete and  reasoned  theology  than  is  to  be  found  in  any  of 
the  other  New  Testament  writers."'^'^  Love  gives  insight. 
Supreme  love  gives  supreme  insight.  Ernesti  called  the 
fourth  Gospel  the  "heart  of  Christ."  John  does  get  at  the 
heart  of  things  as  no  other  apostle  does.  He  had  constant 
access  to  the  very  heart  of  Jesus,  and  he  gives  constant 
expression  to  the  very  heart  of  the  truth.  When  we  read 
his  books  we  say  to  ourselves :  "The  final  word  has  now 
been  spoken.  The  ultimate  reach  of  revelation  is  here. 
There  is  nothing  more  to  be  said." 

The  Johannine  theology  is  reasonable  and  reasoned,  but 
the  processes  of  its  reasoning  seldom  are  in  evidence.  It 
is  of  the  contemplative,  intuitive,  and  mystical  type.  It 
sees  life  as  a  whole.     It  presents  truth  as  a  categorical  im- 


^*  The  poem  and  translation  may  be  found  in  SchaflF's  History  of  the 
Christian  Church,  vol.  i,  p.  588. 
'8  The  Mirror  of  Simple  Souls. 
"  T.  B.  Strong,  Hastings's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  H,  683. 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  69 

perative.  It  is  not  built  up  slowly  and  by  degrees.  As 
recorded,  it  is  finished  and  complete.  Simplicity  and  unity 
are  its  two  characteristics.  There  is  nothing  vague  or 
abstract  about  it;  it  is  altogether  clear  and  concrete.  The 
spiritual  and  the,  practical  are  at  one  with  John.  He  looks 
at  everything  from  the  standpoint  of  the  eternal  life  and 
light  and  love,  but  he  sees  these  at  home  in  the  human 
heart  and  incarnate  in  human  history.  The  riddle  of  the 
universe  is  no  riddle  to  him.  He  has  the  key  which  will 
unlock  all  its  mysteries.  He  has  discovered  the  underlying 
principles  which  will  explain  the  unity  of  time  and  eternity. 
He  knows  the  Source  of  all  things,  the  Reason  of  all 
things,  and  the  Goal  of  all  things.  The  philosophy  and 
the  metaphysics  of  the  ages  never  have  plumbed  deeper 
depths  or  climbed  any  higher  heights  than  have  been 
reached  by  this  humble  and  loving  disciple  of  the  Incar- 
nate One.  All  future  investigation  and  research  bids  fair 
to  come  back  to  the  conclusions  set  forth  in  uttermost 
simplicity  in  these  writings  of  John. 

7.  John  was  the  last  in  the  apostolic  company  to  come 
to  a  commanding  position  in  the  church.  Some  have  re- 
garded this  fact  as  a  prophecy  of  future  church  history. 
James  Stalker  has  voiced  this  opinion  as  follows:  "Peter 
first  stamped  himself  on  the  church,  then  Paul,  last  John. 
And,  as  it  was  in  that  first  period  of  Christianity,  so  was  it 
to  be  in  the  subsequent  ages.  For  fourteen  centuries  Peter 
ruled  Christendom,  as  was  symbolized  by  the  church  in- 
scribed with  his  name  in  the  city  which  was,  for  most  of 
that  period,  the  center  of  the  Christian  world;  then,  at 
the  Reformation,  Paul's  influence  took  the  place  of  Peter's, 
Paul's  doctrine  being  the  soul  of  Protestantism.  The  turn 
of  John  has  still  to  come:  his  spirit  will  dominate  the 
millennial  age.  Perhaps  in  the  individual  Christian  three 
such  stages  may  also  be  distinguished — the  period  of  zeal 
to  begin  with,  when  we  resemble  Peter;  the  period  of 
steady  work  and  reasoned  conviction,  when  we  follow  in 


70  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

the  steps  of  Paul ;  the  period  of  tolerance  and  love,  when 
we  are  acquiring  the  spirit  of  John.'"^^  Faith  is  all-impor- 
tant in  Paul's  theology,  hope  is  the  keynote  of  Peter's 
preaching  and  of  Peter's  epistle,  love  is  characteristic  of 
John.  "Now  abideth  faith,  hope,  love,  these  three ;  and  the 
greatest  of  these  is  love."  "Love  therefore  is  the  fulfill- 
ment of  the  law."  It  was  Paul  who  said  these  things,  and 
that  very  fact  suggests  that  such  a  partition  of  graces 
among  the  apostolic  leaders  is  not  altogether  warranted  by 
the  record  concerning  them,  and  we  must  not,  therefore, 
push  it  too  far. 

Professor  H.  C.  Sheldon,  with  his  usual  caution,  puts  in 
a  partial  disclaimer  at  this  point.  He  says,  "These  different 
standpoints,  the  Petrine,  the  Pauline,  the  Johannine,  dis- 
tinguished as  respects  relative  emphasis  upon  different 
truths,  give  the  appearance  of  successive  doctrinal  develop- 
ments within  the  apostolic  age.  Some  have  imagined  that 
these  developments  have  been  destined  to  a  repetition  upon 
a  wider  scale.  The  Petrine  standpoint,  it  is  claimed,  affili- 
ates with  the  Roman  Catholic  theology,  the  Pauline  with 
the  Protestant,  while  the  Johannine  represents  the  recon- 
ciliation and  higher  union  of  the  two.  As  the  church  has 
passed  through  a  Petrine  and  a  Pauline  stage,  it  has  arrived 
now  at  the  border  of  a  Johannine  era. 

"This  view,  pushed  to  the  extreme,  is  artificial  and  fanci- 
ful. There  is  no  such  broad  contrast  between  Petrinism 
and  Paulinism  as  exists  between  Romanism  and  Protes- 
tantism. No  definite  line  of  demarkation  can  be  drawn 
between  the  teaching  of  Paul  and  of  John.  The  two  types 
are  not  exclusive  of  each  other.  They  were  not  so  in  the 
mind  of  Paul  himself.  His  thought  often  ran  into  the 
domain  of  John,  as  in  that  sublimest  hymn  to  the  praise 
of  love  in  the  First  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  and  also  in 
his  many  references  to  an  interior  life-union  with  Christ, 


w  The  Two  St.  Johns,  p.  2i, 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  71 

The  church  in  its  most  advanced  stage  will  not  put  aside 
Peter  or  Paul  in  favor  of  John,  but  acknowledge  the  truth 
taught  by  each.  Nevertheless,  a  degree  of  truth  pertains 
to  the  theory.  We  have  actually  entered  upon  an  age  which 
lays  more  stress  upon  the  Johannine  theology  than  any  age 
which  has  preceded.'"''^  The  reason  for  that  is  that  we 
are  desirous  of  getting  back  to  Christ,  and  we  find  that 
John  can  help  us  more  than  any  other  man.  "The  most 
Christlike  of  the  apostles  has  left  this  legacy  to  the  church 
— that  without  him  it  could  not  have  adequately  known  its 
Lord."^^  He  had  powers  of  mind  and  powers  of  heart 
which  made  him  the  most  profound  thinker  and  the  greatest 
theologian  of  the  early  church.  He  had  those  qualities  in 
him  which  Jesus  loved  and  which  it  might  be  well  for  us 
to  note  and  emulate. 

Shall  we  try  to  summarize  them  now?  John  was  a  Bo-  , 
anerges,  a  man  of  intense  convictions  and  ardent  affections, 
and  absolutely  fearless  in  the  expression  of  these  in  action 
and  speech.  He  was  no  mollycoddle ;  he  was  a  militant 
saint.  He  had  a  real  reverence  for  genius  and  a  fervent 
love  for  holiness.  He  had  a  natural  delicacy  and  refine- 
ment of  manner.  He  was  of  a  modest  and  retiring  disposi- 
tion. He  was  as  simple  as  a  child  in  his  character.  You 
could  look  through  him  and  find  no  obstruction  to  clear 
vision.  His  eye  was  clear,  his  heart  was  pure,  his  soul  was 
single.  He  had  an  oceanlike  depth  of  nature  which  could 
apprehend  the  sublimest  vision  and  the  profoundest  reve- 
lation of  the  Christian  faith. 

He  lived  long  enough  to  see  the  city  of  Jerusalem  forever 
dethroned  as  the  central  seat  of  a  nation's  worship  and  love 
and  the  temple  to  which  the  tribes  had  gone  up  so  com- 
pletely destroyed  that  there  was  no  stone  left  lying  upon 
another  in  that  place  where  the  religious  authorities  had 

"  Sheldon,  The  Early  Church,  p.  104. 

^W.  T.  Davison,  in  Hastings's  single  volume  Dictionary  of  the 
Bible,  p.  477. 


»/ 


^2  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

hectored  his  Lord.  He  helped  to  spread  the  good  news 
of  a  risen  Christ  and  a  deathless  hope  until  the  gospel  had 
been  carried  from  India  on  the  east  to  Spain  on  the  west. 
He  had  wished  to  call  down  fire  upon  a  village  of  the 
Samaritans  at  one  time  during  his  Lord's  ministry.  He 
went  with  Peter  to  that  village  and  other  villages  of  the 
Samaritans  and  called  down  upon  them  the  fire  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  after  his  Lord  had  risen  from  the  grave.  He  came 
at  last  into  the  principal  city  of  the  western  coast  of  the 
continent  of  Asia,  the  focus  point  of  all  the  traffic  East  and 
West,  the  central  headquarters  of  the  Christian  hosts  of  the 
Roman  world.  It  was  a  city  dedicated  for  centuries  to  the 
worship  of  the  heathen  goddess  Artemis;  but  John  took 
possession  of  it  as  the  Christian  bishop  of  the  universal 
church,  the  most  revered  figure  in  the  Christian  world  at 
the  close  of  the  first  century. 

Here  it  was  that  he  wrote  the  books  which  represent  the 
highest  reach  of  inspiration  and  revelation  in  our  New 
Testament.  He  was  blessed  above  all  others  in  coming 
nearer  to  the  heart  of  our  Lord  than  any  other  disciple. 
He  has  blessed  the  church  above  all  others  in  revealing 
more  of  the  mind  and  heart  of  our  Lord  than  any  other 
disciple  could.  That  was  his  supreme  privilege  as  the 
disciple  whom  Jesus  loved.  Godet  has  summed  it  up  well 
in  these  words :  "The  hour  for  work  had  struck  in  the  first 
place  for  Simon  Peter;  he  had  founded  the  church  in 
Israel  and  planted  the  standard  of  the  new  covenant  on 
the  ruins  of  the  theocracy.  Paul  had  followed;  his  work 
had  been  to  liberate  the  church  from  the  restrictions  of 
expiring  Judaism  and  to  open  to  the  Gentiles  the  door  of 
the  kingdom  of  God.  John  succeeded  them,  he  who  had 
first  come  to  Jesus,  and  whom  his  Master  reserved  for  the 
last.  He  consummated  the  fusion  of  those  heterogeneous 
elements  of  which  the  church  had  been  formed,  and  raised 
Christianity  to  the  relative  perfection  of  which  it  was,  at 
that  time,  susceptible.  .  .  .  Peter  was  distinguished  by  his 


THE  APOSTLE  JOHN  73 

practical  originating  power,  scarcely  compatible  with  ten- 
der receptivity.  Paul  united  to  active  energy  and  the  most 
consummate  practical  ability  the  penetrating  vigor  of  an 
unequaled  dialectic.  For,  although  a  Semite,  he  had  passed 
his  earliest  years  in  one  of  the  most  brilliant  centers  of 
Hellenic  culture  and  had  there  appropriated  the  acute 
forms  of  the  Occidental  mind. 

"John  is  completely  different  from  both.  He  could  not 
have  laid  the  foundations  of  the  Christian  work,  like  Peter;  1  - 
he  could  not  have  contended,  like  Paul,  with  dialectic 
subtlety  against  Jewish  rabbinism,  and  composed  the  Epis- 
tles to  the  Galatians  and  the  Romans.  But,  in  the  closing 
period  of  the  apostolic  age,  it  was  he  who  was  charged 
with  putting  the  completing  work  upon  the  development 
of  the  primitive  church,  which  Peter  had  founded  and 
Paul  had  emancipated.  He  has  bequeathed  to  the  world 
three  works,  in  which  he  has  exalted  to  their  sublime  per- 
fection those  three  supreme  intuitions  in  the  Christian  life : 
that  of  the  person  of  Christ,  in  the  Gospel ;  that  of  the  indi- 
vidual believer,  in  the  first  epistle ;  and  that  of  the  church, 
in  the  Apocalypse.  Under  three  aspects,  the  same  theme — 
the  divine  life  realized  in  man,  eternity  filling  time."*^ 

*'  Commentary  on  John,  vol.  i,  pp.  50,  53. 


PART  II 

THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL:  THE  GOSPEL 
ACCORDING  TO  JOHN 


PART  II 

THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL:  THE  GOSPEL 
ACCORDING  TO  JOHN 

I.     Some  Remarkable  Estimates 

Origen  said,  "This  Gospel  is  the  consummation  of  the 
Gospels  as  the  Gospels  are  of  all  the  Scriptures."  Jerome 
asserts  that  "John  excels  in  the  depths  of  divine  mysteries." 
Luther  agrees,  "It  is  the  unique,  tender,  genuine,  chief 
Gospel,  far  preferable  to  the  other  three.  .  .  .  Should  a 
tyrant  succeed  in  destroying  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  only 
a  single  copy  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  and  the  Gospel 
according  to  John  escape  him,  Christianity  would  be  saved." 
Biedermann  declares  it  is  "the  most  wonderful  of  all  reli- 
gious books."!  Herder  said  it  was  "written  by  the  hand 
of  an  angel" ;  but  that  is  not  true.  It  was  written  by  the 
hand  of  a  man ;  but  that  man  was  a  seer  and  a  saint. 

Culross,  who  has  written  a  volume  entitled  John  Whom 
Jesus  Loved,  says,  "I  believe  the  writings  of  John  have 
been  blotted  by  more  penitents'  tears  and  have  won  more 
hearts  for  the  Redeemer  than  all  the  rest  put  together"  ;2 
and  he  has  collected  into  a  paragraph  the  expressions  of 
affection  and  admiration  for  the  fourth  Gospel  made  by 
many  men.  Two  of  these  we  quote.  One  writer  says,  "It 
is  the  chief  of  the  Gospels  and  one  can  understand  it  only 
by  reclining  on  the  bosom  of  Jesus."  Another  declares,  "It 
stands  out  from  the  other  Gospels  as  the  Sabbath  among 
the  other  days  of  the  week,  as  the  office  of  the  priesthood 
among  the  other  functions  of  the  sons  of  Levi,  or  like  the 

1  Christian  Dogmatics,  p.  254. 
*p.  212. 

77 


V 


78  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

gleaning  of  the  grapes  of  Ephraim,  which  was  better  than 
the  vintage  of  Abiezer."^ 

We  add  the  words  of  Matthias  Claudius:  "I  love  best 
of  all  to  read  in  John.  There  is  in  him  something  so  per- 
fectly wonderful — dusk  and  night,  and  the  quick  lightning 
throbbing  through  them:  the  soft  clouds  of  evening,  and 
behind  the  mass  the  big  full  moon  bodily;  something  so 
sad,  so  high,  so  full  of  presage,  that  one  can  never  weary 
of  it !  In  reading  John  it  always  seems  to  me  that  I  see 
him  before  me,  reclining  at  the  Last  Supper  on  the  bosom 
of  the  Lord,  as  if  his  angel  held  the  light  for  me,  and  at 
certain  parts  would  place  his  arm  around  me,  and  whisper 
something  in  my  ear.  I  am  far  from  understanding  all  I 
read,  yet  often  John's  idea  seems  to  hover  before  me  in 
the  distance ;  and  even  when  I  look  into  a  place  that  is 
entirely  dark,  I  have  a  presension  of  a  great,  glorious 
meaning,  which  I  shall  some  day  understand,  and  hence  I 
catch  so  eagerly  at  every  new  exposition  of  the  Gospel 
according  to  John."^  This  suggests  what  Tholuck  said 
about  the  Gospel :  "This  Gospel  speaks  a  language  to  which 
no  parallel  whatever  is  to  be  found  in  the  whole  compass 
of  literature;  such  childlike  simplicity,  with  such  contem- 
plative profundity;  such  life,  and  such  deep  rest;  such  sad- 
ness, and  such  serenity;  and  above  all,  such  a  breadth  of 
love,  an  eternal  life  which  has  already  dawned,  a  life  which 
rests  in  God,  which  has  overcome  the  disunion  between  the 
world  that  is  and  the  world  to  come,  the  human  and  the 
Divine."^  W.  T.  Davison  declares:  "The  fourth  Gospel 
is  unique  among  the  books  of  the  New  Testament.  In  its 
combination  of  minute  historical  detail  with  lofty  spiritual 
teaching,  in  its  testimony  to  the  Person  and  work  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  in  the  preparation  it  makes  for  the 
foundations   of   Christian   doctrine,   it   stands   alone.      Its 

*  Culross,  p.  io6. 

*  Culross,  pp.  io6,  107. 

'  Conunentary  on  John,  Introduction,  p.  18. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL  79 

influence  upon  the  thought  and  life  of  the  Christian  Church 
has  been  proportionately  deep  and  far-reaching.  It  is  no 
disparagement  of  other  inspired  Scriptures  to  say  that  no 
other  book  of  the  Bible  has  left  such  a  mark  at  the  same 
time  upon  the  profoundest  Christian  thinkers,  and  upon 
simple-minded  believers  at  large."^ 

James  Drummond  is  one  of  the  more  recent  writers  on 
the  fourth  Gospel  and  he  says:  "Whether  we  regard  the 
sublimity  of  its  thought,  the  width  and  spirituality  of  its 
conception  of  religion,  the  depth  of  its  moral  insight,  or 
the  tragic  pathos  of  its  story,  we  cannot  but  feel  that  we 
have  before  us  the  work  of  a  master  mind.  And  when  we 
remember  how  it  has  molded  the  faith  and  touched  the 
heart  and  calmed  the  sorrows  of  generations  of  men,  we 
must  approach  it  with  no  ordinary  reverence,  and  with  a 
desire  to  penetrate  its  inmost  meaning  and  become  more 
thoroughly  imbued  with  its  kindling  power."'^ 

Dr.  Armitage  Robinson  says :  "We  would  not  willingly 
give  up  for  any  other  form  of  narrative  a  Gospel  which 
reveals  to  us  what  the  Christ  grew  to  be  in  the  mind  of 
one  who  leaned  upon  his  bosom  in  youth,  had  cherished  a 
perpetual  recollection  of  him  throughout  long  years  of  toil 
and  suffering  for  his  name,  and  at  the  close  wrote  as  in 
his  Master's  very  presence  his  testimony  to  what  his  Master 
had  been  and  forever  should  be — the  Light  and  the  Life 
of  men."^  Dr.  A.  T.  Pierson  gives  his  estimate  of  the 
fourth  Gospel  in  these  words:  "It  touches  the  heart  of 
Christ.  If  Matthew  corresponds  to  the  Court  of  Israel, 
Mark  to  the  Court  of  the  Priests,  and  Luke  to  the  Court 
of  the  Gentiles,  John  leads  us  past  the  veil  into  the  Holy 
of  holies.  Here  is  the  inmost  temple,  filled  with  the  glory 
of  God."9 


•  Hastings,  op.  cit.,  p.  477. 

'  Character  and  Authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  p.  I. 

8  The  Study  of  the  Gospels,  p.  157. 

"  Keys  to  the  Word,  p.  103. 


8o  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

These  three  writers,  Drummond,  Robinson,  and  Pierson, 
are  writers  of  our  own  generation,  and  they  represent 
widely  different  schools  of  thought.  Drummond  is  a  Uni- 
tarian, Robinson  belongs  to  the  Church  of  England,  and 
Pierson  is  an  old-school  Presbyterian.  They  agree  in  their 
high  esteem  for  the  fourth  Gospel,  and  in  so  doing  they 
agree  with  the  saints  and  scholars  and  commentators  who 
preceded  them.  Philip  Schaff  said:  "The  best  comes  last. 
The  fourth  Gospel  is  the  Gospel  of  Gospels,  the  holy  of 
holies  in  the  New  Testament.  .  .  .  The  Gospel  according 
to  John  is  the  most  original,  the  most  important,  the  most 
influential  book  in  all  literature.  ...  It  is  simple  as  a  child 
and  sublime  as  a  seraph,  gentle  as  a  lamb  and  bold  as  an 
eagle,  deep  as  the  sea  and  high  as  the  heavens." ^^  And 
Lange  declared,  "Since  Irenseus  it  has  remained  for  the 
sons  of  the  apostolic  spirit  the  crown  of  the  apostolic 
Gospels. "1^  One  reason  for  these  remarkable  estimates  of 
the  value  of  the  fourth  Gospel  is  that  all  Christians  have 
felt  that  Schenkel  was  right  when  he  said,  "Without  this 
Gospel  the  unfathomable  depth,  the  inaccessible  height  of 
the  character  of  the  Saviour  of  the  world  would  be  wanting 
to  us,  and  his  boundless  influence,  renewing  all  humanity, 
would  forever  remain  a  mystery." ^^  As  we  read  we  are 
assured  that  here  at  last  is  the  worthy  and  adequate  picture 
of  the  life  of  Jesus  among  men. 

II.     Some  Remarkable  Omissions 

If  the  four  Gospels  are  the  most  precious  books  in  the 
world's  literature  and  the  fourth  Gospel  is  the  most  pre- 
cious of  the  four,  it  must  be  a  very  remarkable  book  indeed. 
We  turn  to  its  study  with  great  expectation.  It  is  a  Life 
of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  and  it  is  a  most  inadequate  biography. 


^°  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  vol.  i,  pp.  675,  688. 

"  Addresses  on  John,  p.  482. 

"  Schenkel,  A  Sketch  of  the  Character  of  Jesus,  p.  34. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL  8i 

It  is  too  small  a  book  to  tell  us  half  the  things  we  would 
like  to  know.  It  leaves  out  more  than  it  puts  in.  It  is 
much  smaller  than  any  of  the  standard  biographies  of 
to-day.  We  turn  to  our  library  shelves  to  look  at  some 
of  the  books  by  way  of  comparison;  and  we  find  that 
Boswell's  Life  of  Samuel  Johnson  has  1,824  pages,  and 
Allen's  Life  of  Phillips  Brooks  has  1,596  pages,  and  Smith's 
Life  of  Henry  Drummond  has  534  pages.  The  Life  of  our 
Lord  by  the  apostle  John  occupies  less  than  thirty  pages  in 
our  Revised  Version.  It  is  a  mere  pigmy  beside  these  giant 
books.  The  average  modern  biography  is  fifteen,  twenty, 
fifty,  sixty  times  as  long  as  this  biography  written  by  John. 

When  we  turn  to  our  modern  lives  of  Jesus  the  difference 
is  just  as  apparent.  The  Prophet  of  Nazareth,  by  Nathaniel 
Schmidt,  has  422  pages ;  the  Life  of  Jesus,  by  Dawson, 
452  pages ;  Holtzmann's  has  542  pages ;  The  Days  of  His 
Flesh,  by  David  Smith,  has  593  pages;  The  Life  of  Our 
Lord,  by  Andrews,  has  651  pages;  Strauss's  Life  of  Jesus 
has  784  pages;  Beyschlag's  has  970;  Farrar's  has  988; 
Weiss's  has  1,143;  Geikie's  has  1,236;  Edersheim's  The 
Life  and  Times  of  Jesus  has  1,524  pages ;  and  Keim's  Jesus 
of  Nazareth  has  1,904  pages.  John  has  told  us  all  he  cared 
to  say  in  thirty  pages ;  and  at  the  same  time  he  says  that 
if  all  had  been  written  which  might  have  been  written,  the 
world  itself  could  not  contain  all  the  books  covering  the 
theme.i^  Evidently,  John  has  thought  best  to  leave  out 
much  interesting  material. 

These  other  books  are  from  more  than  ten  to  more  than 
sixty  times  as  long  as  the  fourth  Gospel,  and  the  most  of 
their  material  is  worth  while,  and  they  tell  us  in  detail 
about  many  things  of  which  John  makes  mere  mention  or 
which  he  never  notices  at  all ;  and  yet  the  fourth  Gospel 
is  worth  all  of  these  other  books  put  together!  We  put 
that  down  as  the  first  remarkable  thing  about  this  remark- 

"  John  21.  25. 


82  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

able  book — that  it  is  so  small  and  fragmentary  and  inade- 
quate a  biography.  A  mountain  of  barren  rock  may  be 
imposing  because  of  its  size  and  yet  not  be  as  valuable  as 
a  single  nugget  of  pure  gold.  The  fourth  Gospel  is  pure 
gold.  It  has  no  admixture  of  alloy.  It  is  a  residuum. 
John  has  chosen  to  free  it  from  much  that  we  would  have 
supposed  rightly  belonged  in  it. 

Let  us  look  at  some  of  these  remarkable  omissions. 
I.  To  begin  with,  John  omits  the  whole  record  of  the  first 
thirty  years  of  the  life  of  Jesus.  He  gives  us  no  genealogy, 
no  account  of  the  annunciation,  and  he  never  suggests  that 
there  was  such  a  thing  as  an  immaculate  conception.  He 
tells  us  nothing  about  the  infancy  and  youth  of  our  Lord, 
nothing  about  his  development  of  mind  and  soul,  his  early 
environment  and  teaching.  These  were  the  most  important 
years  of  his  life  to  Jesus  himself,  but  John  says  nothing 
about  them ! 

2.  John  tells  us  how  Jesus  meets  the  Baptist  at  the  Jor- 
dan, but  he  has  told  us  nothing  about  the  early  life  or 
ministry  of  the  forerunner,  as  he  tells  us  nothing  about  his 
later  imprisonment  and  death.  We  learn  about  these  things 
from  the  other  evangelists ;  but  we  feel  sure  that  John  knew 
more  about  the  message  and  work  of  the  wilderness  prophet 
than  any  other  of  the  New  Testament  writers.  He  has 
not  chosen  to  tell  us  a  word  about  John  the  Baptist  until 
some  time  after  the  baptism  of  Jesus;  and  he  gives  us  no 
direct  account  of  that  baptism,  but  only  a  reference  to  it 
as  a  past  event  in  the  experience  of  the  Baptist  himself. 

3.  In  the  fourth  Gospel  there  is  no  mention  of  the 
temptation  in  the  wilderness.  It  was  one  of  the  capital 
events  in  the  life  of  our  Lord.  It  was  one  of  the  crises  in 
his  spiritual  experience.  It  would  seem  that  John  must 
have  been  fascinated  by  the  account  Jesus  gave  of  it;  but 
we  never  would  know  from  this  Gospel  that  he  ever  had 
heard  of  such  a  thing. 

4.  After  the  temptation  the  transfiguration  was  the  next 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL  83 

most  important  event  in  the  ministry  of  Jesus.    John  was    / 
one  of  the  three  apostles  chosen  to  witness  this  wonder; 
yet  he  gives  us  no  account  of  it  in  his  narrative.    We  are 
wholly  dependent  upon  the  other  Gospels  for  all  that  we 
know  about  it. 

5.  We  learn  from  the  other  evangelists  that  John  was 
one  of  the  chosen  three  who  were  present  at  the  raising  of 
the  daughter  of  Jairus  to  life.  It  was  one  of  the  chief 
miracles  of  Christ's  ministry;  but  John  says  nothing 
about  it. 

6.  There  is  no  institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper  in  the 
fourth  Gospel.  John  gives  us  a  fuller  account  of  the  hap- 
penings at  the  last  supper  of  Jesus  with  his  disciples  than  "^ 
anyone  else  has  recorded  for  us,  but  he  says  never  a  word 
about  the  establishment  of  any  solemn  ordinance  to  be 
observed  in  the  future  history  of  the  church. 

7.  There  was  that  terrible  Gethsemane  agony  and  prayer, 
the  closing  struggle  of  the  man  Jesus  with  the  powers  of 
darkness,  ending  with  the  same  triumph  which  had  marked 
that  beginning  struggle  in  the  wilderness.  John  omits  the 
account  of  the  agony  and  prayer  as  he  omitted  all  mention 
of  the  conflict  and  victory  there. 

8.  Since  John's  whole  book  was  written  that  men  might 
believe  that  Jesus  was  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  it  is 
most  strange  that  he  omits  all  mention  of  that  sublime 
declaration  of  the  Messiahship.  and  of  the  power  of  world 
judgment  made  by  Jesus  in  his  trial  before  the  Sanhedrin. 
We  would  have  supposed  that  that  testimony  would  have 
been  beyond  value  for  the  purposes  of  John's  biography. 
He  omits  it  altogether. 

9.  John  gives  us  no  account  of  the  ascension.  He  records      / 
the  promise  made  by  Jesus  to  Mary,  "I  ascend  unto  my  ^ 
Father  and  your  Father,  and  my  God  and  your  God,"^^ 
but  this  climaxing  event  of  the  whole  history  of  this  mar- 

"  John  20.  17.  « 


84  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

velous  life  is  not  described  either  in  general  or  in  detail  by 
John. 

What  a  strange  biography  this  is!  How  could  anyone 
write  a  life  of  Jesus  which  would  be  worth  anything  at  all 
and  omit  from  the  narrative  all  account  of  the  virgin  birth 
and  the  baptism  and  the  temptation  and  the  transfiguration 
and  the  Gethsemane  agony  and  the  glorious  ascension  to 
the  right  hand  of  God !  Surely,  these  events  are  too  impor- 
tant to  be  omitted  by  any  biographer !  Are  they  ?  Here  is 
the  most  precious  biography  of  Jesus  we  have,  and  it  tells 
us  about  none  of  them,  and  we  are  not  half  through  with 
our  list  of  the  remarkable  omissions  which  characterize  the 
Gospel  according  to  John ! 

10.  In  the  two  and  a  half  years  of  the  public  ministry  of 
Jesus  there  are  at  least  ten  months  which  are  an  utter  blank 
in  John's  narrative.  In  all  probability  Jesus  said  just  as 
wonderful  things  and  did  just  as  wonderful  deeds  in  these 
months  as  in  those  which  John  has  recorded,  but  John 
leaves  them  entirely  out  of  his  story.  There  were  over  a 
thousand  days  in  the  Lord's  ministry,  and  John  has  given 
us  a  record  of  only  about  twenty  of  them.  Seven  chapters 
of  his  Gospel — one  third  of  the  book — are  devoted  to  the 
account  of  one  day,  counting  from  sunset  to  sunset  as  the 
Jews  did,  and  thus  including  the  night  of  the  betrayal  and 
the  day  of  the  crucifixion.  We  rejoice  in  the  full  record 
of  this  day,  but  how  many  important  days  must  have  been 
left  wholly  unrecorded ! 

11.  There  are  no  children  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  The 
third  Gospel  has  been  called  the  Gospel  of  Childhood,  and 
in  all  the  synoptic  Gospels  the  children  appear  again  and 
again.  Jesus  blesses  them  and  says  that  of  such  is  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  He  takes  them  into  his  arms.  They 
are  attracted  to  him.  They  love  him,  and  in  the  triumphal 
entry  into  Jerusalem  in  the  last  days  they  precede  the 
Master  shouting,  "Hosanna  to  the  son  of  David" ;  and  in 
the  temple  they  continued  to  cry,  "Hosanna  in  the  highest," 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL  85 

until  the  chief  priests  and  scribes  became  indignant  and 
Jesus  was  moved  to  defend  these  little  ones  for  their  hearty 
if  noisy  praise.  We  are  glad  that  the  Gospel  pages  have 
the  figures  of  these  innocent  little  ones  dancing  and  pranc- 
ing through  them ;  and  when  we  turn  to  the  Gospel  accord- 
ing to  John  we  feel  a  distinct  disappointment  when  we  find 
that  the  children  have  wholly  disappeared  from  the  picture 
of  the  ministry  of  Jesus.  If  John  lived  and  died  an  un- 
married man,  he  had  no  children  of  his  own,  and  he  may 
not  have  had  that  personal  liking  for  all  children  which 
Jesus  always  manifested.  Anyway,  he  has  written  a  Gospel  ^ 
story  without  a  child  in  it  from  beginning  to  end. 

12.  There  are  no  demoniacs  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  The 
synoptics  have  frequent  accounts  of  demonized  individuals 
and  the  casting  out  of  demons  is  a  characteristic  miracle 
in  the  ministry  of  Jesus.  There  are  no  exorcisms  in  the 
Gospel  according  to  John.  His  enemies  say  to  Jesus,  "Thou 
hast  a  demon,"!^  but  this  unreal,  falsely  charged  demoni- 
acal possession  is  the  only  one  recognized  or  mentioned  in 
the  book. 

13.  There  are  no  lepers  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  The  J 
cleansing  of  a  leper  was  a  most  marvelous  miracle,  and  the 
other  gospel  writers  detail  the  power  of  Jesus  in  accom- 
plishing this  impossible  cure  by  a  touch  or  a  word ;  but 
John  never  mentions  a  single  case  of  the  kind.  We  never 
would  have  known  from  this  Gospel  that  Jesus  ever  met 
any  lepers  or  had  anything  to  do  with  them  in  his  min- 
istry. 

14.  There  are  no  scribes  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  We  learn 
from  the  synoptics  that  the  scribes  always  were  present  in 
the  Lord's  later  ministry,  plying  Jesus  with  hard  questions, 
spying  upon  his  whole  procedure  as  his  bitter  and  unrelent- 
ing foes.  If  we  decide  against  the  genuineness  of  the  para- 
graph concerning  the  woman  taken  in  adultery,  as  most  of 


ifi  John  7.  20;  8.  48;  8.  52;  10.  20. 


86  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

the  authorities  do,  then  the  word  "scribe"  does  not  occur  in 
the  Gospel  according  to  John  from  beginning  to  end. 

15.  There  are  no  Sadducees  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  They 
are  found  in  the  Gospels  according  to  Mark  and  Matthew 
and  Luke  and  in  the  book  of  Acts,  but  not  here.  We  are 
told  that  they  questioned  Jesus  and  he  silenced  them.  We 
read  later  how  they  questioned  Jesus  at  his  trial  and  he  was 
silent  before  them,  until  they  provoked  him  into  the  con- 
fession of  his  Messiahship.  In  the  fourth  Gospel  they 
never  appear  or  are  never  named  from  beginning  to  end  of 
the  narrative. 

16.  There  are  no  publicans  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  If  the 
scribes  were  the  enemies  of  Jesus,  the  publicans  were  his 
friends.  He  ate  with  them  and  consorted  with  them.  They 
heard  him  gladly,  for  he  preached  good  news  for  them 
as  well  as  for  any  other  class  of  society.  The  scribes  mur- 
mured because  Jesus  feasted  with  the  publicans ;  but  neither 
the  murmurers  nor  those  who  occasioned  their  murmuring 
find  a  place  in  John's  narrative.  We  would  have  known 
nothing  about  them  if  we  had  been  dependent  upon  John 
alone  for  our  information  concerning  the  ministry  of  our 
Lord. 

17.  There  is  no  list  of  the  twelve  apostles  in  the  fourth 
Gospel.  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke  thought  it  worth  while 
to  record  these  names,  and  Luke  has  given  the  list 
twice,  once  in  each  of  his  books;  but  John  omits  it  alto- 
gether. 

18.  There  is  no  Sermon  on  the  Mount  in  the  fourth 
Gospel.  That  sermon  was  the  most  important  manifesto 
of  the  Messianic  king.  It  set  forth  the  foundation  princi- 
ples of  the  new  kingdom  of  God  which  he  had  come  to 
establish  on  earth.  John  makes  no  reference  to  it  any- 
where in  his  book. 

19.  There  is  no  prescribed  formula  of  prayer  in  the 
fourth  Gospel.  Both  Matthew  and  Luke  have  recorded 
that  Jesus  told  the  disciples  when  they  prayed  to  say,  "Our 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL  87 

Father,  who  art  in  heaven,  hallowed  be  thy  name."  John 
omits  all  prescription  of  ritual  service,  sacramental  or  devo- 
tional. We  are  dependent  upon  others  for  all  of  these 
things. 

20.  The  main  themes  of  the  discourses  of  Jesus  as  re- 
corded in  the  synoptics  are  the  conditions  of  entrance  into 
the  Kingdom.  These  conditions  are  two  in  number — 
repentance  and  faith.  Now,  it  is  a  strange  fact  that  the 
Greek  words  for  "repentance"  and  "faith,"  fierdvoia  and 
m<7Tf^,are  not  to  be  found  in  the  fourth  Gospel  at  all.  The 
ideas  they  represent  may  be  in  the  book,  but  the  words 
themselves  do  not  occur.  According  to  Luke,  Jesus  said, 
'T  am  not  come  to  call  the  righteous  but  sinners  to  repent- 
ance."^^ In  John  this  call  is  not  recorded.  The  Greek 
word  for  "faith,"  ntort,^,  is  used  three  hundred  and  forty 
times  in  our  New  Testament,  but  it  does  not  occur  once  in 
the  Gospel  according  to  John.  Some  people  would  have 
difficulty  in  presenting  the  gospel  without  using  the  words 
"repentance"  and  "faith."  John  does  it,  and  without  any 
difficulty  at  all. 

21.  Another  item  of  what  some  people  would  consider  a 
most  essential  element  in  the  presentation  of  the  gospel  is 
entirely  omitted  by  John.  He  never  has  a  word  to  say 
about  hell  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  his  book. 
Neither  Hades  nor  Gehenna  or  Tartarus  finds  any  place 
in  his  pages. 

22.  There  are  no  detailed  eschatologies  in  the  fourth 
Gospel,  such  as  we  find  in  the  synoptics.  Here,  instead  of 
their  predictions  of  the  Parousia,  we  have  the  promise  of 
the  Paraclete.  The  coming  of  the  Comforter  is  substituted 
for  the  coming  of  the  Judge  and  King. 

23.  There  are  no  proverbs  in  the  fourth  Gospel,  such  as 
we  find  in  the  synoptics.  Those  sharp  and  pointed  sayings 
which  have  pierced  to  the  heart  and  have  stuck  to  the 

«  Luke  5.  32. 


88  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

memory  of  all  succeeding  generations  of  men  are  wholly 
lacking  in  the  Gospel  according  to  John. 

24.  There  are  no  parables  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  Jesus 
acts  parables  here,  but  he  does  not  narrate  them. 

Who  would  undertake  to  write  a  Gospel  and  say  nothing 
about  the  birth  of  Jesus  and  nothing  about  his  infancy  and 
youth,  his  baptism,  his  temptation,  his  transfiguration,  and 
his  ascension;  and  omit  all  mention  of  the  cleansing  of 
lepers  and  the  casting  out  of  demons,  and  never  introduce 
any  children  or  scribes  or  Sadducees  or  publicans  into  the 
narrative,  and  leave  out  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  and  the 
eschatological  discourses  and  all  the  proverbs  and  all  the 
parables  ?  Who  would  undertake  to  write  a  Gospel  without 
any  of  these  things  in  it?  Surely,  nothing  much  worth 
while  would  remain.  Surely,  the  result  of  any  such  effort 
would  be  a  poor  affair  indeed.  Almost  all  of  the  choicest 
portions  of  the  life  and  teachings  of  Jesus  would  be  un- 
touched. Take  these  things  out  of  the  synoptic  narratives 
and  there  would  be  a  very  pitiful  remnant  of  their  biogra- 
phy left.  It  would  be  an  emasculated  and  mangled  and 
altogether  unworthy  presentation  of  the  work  and  words  of 
Jesus.  We  are  glad  that  the  synoptics  have  told  us  about 
all  of  these  things.  We  would  not  undertake  to  write  a 
Gospel  which  omitted  them.  We  could  not  do  it,  and  make 
a  book  worthy  of  our  Lord.  John  could;  and  John  did! 
He  wrote  a  Gospel  without  any  of  these  things  and  not  only 
made  it  worthy  of  a  place  in  the  canon,  but  made  it  the 
chief  treasure  of  the  New  Testament  books  I^'^ 


"  We  have  called  the  fourth  Gospel  a  Life  of  Jesus,  and  such  it  is. 
We  have  said  it  was  a  very  inadequate  biography,  and  it  surely  is. 
However,  to  be  fair  to  the  apostle  John,  we  ought  to  add  that  his 
primary  purpose  in  writing  was  neither  biographical  nor  historical,  but 
religious.  He  wrote  that  men  might  beUeve  and  have  life  (John  20.  31), 
and  no  one  will  question  the  adequacy  of  his  Gospel  to  that  end.  As 
Drummond  says,  "It  is  not  its  object  to  tell  us  all  that  can  be  learned 
about  the  life  of  Jesus,  but  to  awaken  or  strengthen  our  faith  in  him" 
(pp.  21,  22). 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL  89 

IIL     Some  Remarkable  New  Features 

It  is  a  most  remarkable  Gospel  because  of  the  things  it 
omits.  It  is  the  most  valued  of  all  the  Gospels  because  of 
the  things  it  adds  to  the  synoptic  narratives.  It  has  been 
estimated  that  ninety-two  per  cent  of  the  contents  of  the 
fourth  Gospel  are  peculiar  to  itself.  John  has  omitted 
much  of  great  worth,  but  in  its  stead  he  has  brought  us  a 
new  treasure  of  such  inestimable  value  that,  like  the  ruler 
of  the  feast  at  Cana,  we  are  constrained  to  say  that  the 
best  has  come  last.  Good  as  the  synoptics  were,  we  prefer 
John's  narrative  to  any  one  of  them. 

Let  us  note  some  of  the  remarkable  new  features  of  the 
fourth  Gospel  now. 

1.  The  parables  are  the  poems  in  our  Lord's  preaching, 
the  bright  spots  in  the  landscape  of  the  synoptic  narrative, 
like  clusters  of  flowers  in  the  open  fields.  John  has  no 
parables,  no  imaginative  stories  wrought  out  in  detail  to 
illustrate  some  truth  or  point  some  moral.  He  has,  instead, 
new  metaphors,  strange  personifications,  centering  for  the 
most  part  about  the  Master  himself,  in  which  the  bread  and 
the  vine,  the  gate,  the  door,  the  good  shepherd,  the  light, 
and  the  truth  either  represent  him  or  are  identified  with 
him. 

2.  Instead  of  the  proverbs  found  in  the  synoptics,  John  ^ 
introduces  us  to  the  discussion  of  metaphysical  problems. 
For  the  most  part  the  discourses  of  Jesus  as  recorded  by 
him  are  not  occasioned  by  the  happenings  of  the  day.  They 
have  a  character  of  timelessness  about  them  which  has 
caused  this  Gospel  to  be  called  the  "gospel  of  eternity." 

3.  Instead  of  the  public  discourses  of  the  synoptics,  we 
have  in  the  fourth  Gospel  a  number  of  private  conversa-  \) 
tions.  There  are  fourteen  of  these  in  all.  Julicher  has 
called  our  attention  to  the  fact  that  these  conversations  for 
the  most  part  seem  to  be  built  up  after  a  certain  scheme 
or  pattern.   First,  there  is  an  introductory  question ;  second, 


90  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Jesus  answers  with  a  statement  which  is  capable  of  a  double 
construction;  third,  this  answer  is  misunderstood;  fourth, 
Jesus  explains  and  sets  the  misunderstanding  straight ;  fifth, 
he  proceeds  to  give  fundamental  instruction  upon  the 
theme. ^^  The  longest  discourses  recorded  in  the  fourth 
Gospel  and  the  most  precious  in  the  book  are  those  given 
to  the  disciples  in  private  just  before  the  betrayal  in  Gethse- 
mane. 

4.  Instead  of  the  Disciple's  Prayer,  Our  Father  who  art 
in  heaven,  we  have  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  longest  prayer 
of  Jesus  and  the  only  prayer  recorded  at  any  length  in  any 
of  the  Gospels,  in  the  seventeenth  chapter  of  this  book. 

5.  There  are  eight  miracles  recorded  in  the  fourth 
Gospel,  and  six  of  them  are  new.  These  new  miracles  are : 
Turning  water  into  wine  (chapter  2),  Healing  the  noble- 
man's son  (chapter  4),  Healing  the  man  at  the  pool  (chap- 
ter 5),  Healing  the  man  born  blind  (chapter  9),  Raising 
of  Lazarus  (chapter  11),  and  the  Draught  of  fishes  (chap- 
ter 21).  John  does  not  call  these  miracles.  He  calls  them 
simply  signs  or  works. 

6.  There  are  some  new  persons  in  this  Gospel :  Nathanael 
(chapter  i),  Nicodemus  (chapter  3),  the  woman  of  Sa- 
maria (chapter  4),  the  impotent  man  (chapter  5),  the 
blind  man  (chapter  9),  and  Lazarus  (chapter  11).  All  of 
these  are  to  be  found  in  this  Gospel  alone.  The  name  of 
Malchus  occurs  only  in  the  fourth  Gospel;  and  Thomas 
and  Philip  and  Judas,  not  Iscariot,  are  more  prominent  in 
this  Gospel  than  in  any  other. 

7.  There  are  some  new  titles  in  this  Gospel.  John  alone 
calls  Jesus  the  Logos  and  the  Only-Begotten,  and  he  alone 
calls  the  Holy  Spirit  the  Paraclete.  John  tells  us  much  not 
recorded  elsewhere  about  the  work  of  the  Paraclete  in  the 
world,  but  the  name  of  the  Holy  Spirit  occurs  in  his  writ- 
ings less  often  than  in  the  writings  of  Luke  and  of  Paul. 


«  John  2.  19;  3.  3;  4.  10;  4.  32;  6.  34;  13.  36;  14.  5. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL  91 

In  the  fourth  Gospel  the  Holy  Spirit  is  named  only  four 
times. 

8.  There  are  whole  sections  of  this  Gospel  whose  ma-  ^ 
terial  is  entirely  new.  The  prologue,  the  testimony  of  John 
the  Baptist  to  the  Lamb  of  God,  the  first  disciples  (chapter 
i),  the  Cana  miracle  and  the  first  cleansing  of  the  temple 
(chapter  2),  the  conversation  with  Nicodemus  and  the  first 
ministry  of  Jesus  in  Judaea  (chapter  3),  the  conversation 
with  the  woman  at  the  well  and  the  second  Cana  miracle 
(chapter  4),  the  healing  of  the  impotent  man  and  the  dis- 
course on  world- judgment  (chapter  5),  the  discourse  on 
the  bread  of  life  (chapter  6),  the  discourse  at  the  feast  of 
tabernacles  and  its  results  (chapter  7),  the  discourse  on 
the  light  of  the  world  and  its  results  (chapter  8),  the  heal- 
ing of  the  blind  man  and  its  results  (chapter  9),  the  dis- 
course on  the  good  shepherd  (chapter  10),  the  raising  of 
Lazarus  and  its  results  (chapter  11),  the  visit  of  the  Greeks 
and  the  subsequent  discourses  of  Jesus  (chapter  12),  the 
washing  of  the  disciples'  feet  (chapter  13),  the  farewell 
discourses  with  the  disciples  (chapters  14,  15,  and  16),  the 
Lord's  prayer  for  the  church  (chapter  17),  the  two  appear- 
ances to  the  assembled  disciples  in  Jerusalem  after  the 
resurrection  (chapter  20),  the  appearance  at  the  sea  of 
Tiberias  and  the  epilogue  (chapter  21).  These  are  simply 
the  principal  sections  of  new  material,  not  paralleled  in  any 
of  the  synoptics;  and  they  form  the  greater  part  of  the 
fourth  Gospel. 

9.  In  the  Passion  history  John  makes  his  closest  ap- 
proach to  the  synoptic  narrative,  but  even  here  he  has  many 
new  items  of  information.  He  alone  tells  us  that  those 
who  came  to  arrest  Jesus  in  Gethsemane  went  backward 
and  fell  to  the  ground  when  Jesus  advanced  upon  them. 
He  alone  records  that  it  was  Simon  Peter  who  smote  off 
Malchus's  ear.  He  alone  records  the  statements  made  to 
Pilate  about  the  kingdom  of  the  truth,  a  kingdom  not  of 
this  world.  He  alone  has  written  down  Pilate's  Ecce  Homo, 


92  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

"Behold  the  man !"  He  alone  tells  us  about  the  division  of 
the  garments  of  Jesus  among  the  soldiers.  He  alone  has 
recorded  the  thoughtfulness  of  Jesus  in  providing  a  home 
for  Mary  the  mother  after  his  death.  He  alone  saw  the 
pouring  forth  of  the  water  and  the  blood  from  the  wounded 
side  of  Jesus.  He  alone  tells  us  how  Nicodemus  assisted 
in  the  burial  of  the  Lord. 

This  will  be  sufficient  to  indicate  how  much  we  are  in- 
debted to  the  apostle  John  for  new  and  interesting  and 
important  information  concerning  the  life  and  death  of 
Jesus.  The  fourth  Gospel  is  remarkable  for  the  new  light 
it  throws  upon  the  ministry  of  our  Lord.  It  regards  that 
ministry  from  a  new  point  of  view.  It  looks  upon  it 
through  new  eyes,  the  eyes  of  a  seer  and  a  saint.  John 
listened  to  the  words  of  Jesus  even  as  the  others  did; 
but  his  ears  were  opened  to  hear  as  they  did  not  hear. 
>^  He  heard  the  hidden  harmonies.  He  saw  into  the  very 
heart  of  things.  He  realized  the  supreme  marvel  of  it  all, 
and  he  gave  it  a  most  beautiful  setting  when  he  undertook 
to  put  it  into  writing  for  others  to  read  and  enjoy. 

IV.     A  Remarkable  Work  of  Art 

The  fourth  Gospel  has  been  called  the  "supreme  literary 
work  of  the  world."  The  theme  was  worthy  and  the  writer 
was  a  choice  spirit  and  he  did  his  best  to  make  his  story 
duly  simple  and  sublime.  The  fourth  Gospel  is  remarkable 
as  a  work  of  art.  This  has  been  recognized  by  the  critics. 
Chrysostom  said  of  the  fourth  Gospel :  "John  has  pervaded 
and  embraced  the  whole  world,  he  has  filled  it  with  his  cry, 
not  by  the  greatness  of  the  sound,  but  by  a  tongue  moved 
by  divine  grace.  And  what  is  wonderful  is  that  this  great 
cry  is  not  harsh,  not  destitute  of  sweetness,  but  sweeter 
and  more  charming,  endowed  with  more  power  to  attract 
than  all  the  harmony  of  music;  and  besides  all  these,  it  is 
most  holy  and  awe-inspiring,  filled  with  such  secrets,  con- 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL  93 

veying  such  good  things,  that  those  who  receive  and  guard 
it  with  dihgence  and  earnestness  are  no  longer  men,  no 
more  abide  upon  earth :  they  have  placed  themselves  above 
the  things  of  time,  they  are  partakers  of  the  state  of  angels, 
and  thus  dwell  upon  earth,  as  if  it  were  heaven. "i**  There 
is  something  of  the  extravagance  of  oratory  in  these  state- 
ments, and  yet  they  express  the  overflowing  gratitude  and 
love  of  many  souls  to  John. 

Augustine  is  almost  as  unstinted  in  his  praise.  He  says: 
"John,  as  if  it  oppressed  him  to  walk  on  earth,  has  opened 
his  words  as  it  were  with  a  burst  of  thunder,  has  lifted  him- 
self not  only  above  earth  and  every  sphere  of  sky  and 
heaven,  but  even  above  every  host  of  angels,  and  every 
order  of  invisible  powers,  and  reaches  to  Him  by  whom 
all  things  were  made,  as  he  says,  'In  the  beginning  was  the 
Word,'  etc.  He  proclaims  other  things  in  keeping  with 
this  great  sublimity  with  which  he  begins,  and  speaks  of 
the  divinity  of  our  Lord  as  no  other  person  has  spoken. 
He  pours  forth  that  into  which  he  had  drunk.  For  not 
without  a  reason  is  it  mentioned  in  his  own  Gospel,  that 
at  the  feast  he  reclined  upon  the  bosom  of  his  Lord.  From 
that  bosom  he  had  in  secrecy  drunk  in  the  stream,  but  what 
he  drank  in  secret  he  poured  forth  openly."^*^  Jiilicher,  in 
his  Introduction,  says,  "We  have  here  a  kind  of  dramatic 
creation."  Westcott  declares :  "This  gospel  is,  in  fact,  the 
divine  Hebrew  epic.  Every  part  is  impressed  with  the 
noblest  features  of  Hebrew  poetry,  and  the  treatment  of 
the  subject  satisfies  the  conditions  of  variety,  progress,  and 
completeness,  which,  combined  with  the  essential  nature 
of  the  subject  itself,  make  up  the  notion  of  a  true  epic."^* 
We  think  it  might  be  compared  better  with  the  Greek  epic 
and  drama.  All  must  grant  that  the  fourth  Gospel  is  a 
work  of  literary  art. 

"  Prooem.  in  Horn,  in  lohan. 

''o  Tract.  36  in  lohan. 

"  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  p.  275. 


94  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

This  is  manifest  in  the  following  particulars:  i.  Its  artis- 
tic form.  It  observes  all  the  finer  laws  governing  the 
artistic  composition  of  the  ancient  classical  tragedies.  As 
in  these,  the  catastrophe  is  announced  in  the  beginning,  and 
the  whole  action  of  the  narrative  tends  irresistibly  toward 
the  tragic  close.  As  in  the  Iliad  and  the  Niebelungenlied, 
and  as  in  the  tragedies  of  ^schylus  and  Sophocles,  the 
terrible  outcome  always  is  kept  in  sight.  The  shadow  of 
the  cross  falls  upon  the  first  page.  The  certainty  of  the 
hero's  horrible  death  confronts  us  at  every  turn.  The  first 
time  the  man  Jesus  appears  he  is  heralded  as  a  Lamb  ap- 
pointed for  sacrifice.  At  the  marriage  feast  his  "hour"  is 
not  yet  come,  but  its  dread  significance  is  present  in  his 
mind.  When  he  feeds  the  multitude,  that  joyous  occasion 
is  marred  in  their  memory  by  his  discourse  on  eating  his 
flesh  and  drinking  his  blood.  Most  of  the  action  is  con- 
fined to  the  doomed  city  of  Jerusalem.  Galilee  might  lie 
bathed  in  the  sunshine,  filled  with  the  glory  of  lilies  and 
the  singing  of  birds;  but  over  Jerusalem  the  clouds  were 
gathering,  big  with  thunder,  and  the  lightning  flashes  darted 
through  them  like  travail-pains.  John  did  not  sit  down 
consciously  to  compose  a  tragedy.  He  was  telling  a  true 
story.  He  was  recording  a  genuine  biography;  but  in  the 
telling  he  is  artistic  in  fuller  measure  than  the  synoptics 
ever  were.  In  the  recording  he  follows  the  laws  of  the 
highest  literature.  He  gives  life,  color,  movement  to  his 
narrative.  His  book  has  the  freshness  and  the  simplicity 
and  the  beauty  and  the  power  of  the  primitive  masterpieces 
of  the  world's  writing. 

2.  A  second  manifestation  of  artistic  composition  in  the 
fourth  Gospel  is  to  be  found  in  its  concentration  of  action. 
Note  how  the  action  is  concentrated  in  the  progress  of  the 
story.  There  are  two  great  divisions  of  the  book.  In  the 
first  division,  chapters  1-12,  both  time  and  place  are  mani- 
fold. The  public  ministry  of  Jesus  touches  the  three  prov- 
inces of  the  land  and  the  three  years  of  his  activity.     In 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL  95 

the  second  division,  chapters  13-20,  the  action  is  centered 
in  the  one  city  of  Jerusalem,  and  a  large  part  of  it  is  con- 
fined to  one  room;  and  the  time  is  limited  to  one  evening 
and  a  few  days.  More  and  more  the  scene  narrows  from 
the  whole  land  to  Judaea,  and  from  Judaea  to  Jerusalem, 
and  in  Jerusalem  to  the  one  upper  room  of  the  farewell 
discourses;  and  the  interest  intensifies  as  the  narrative 
lengthens  and  the  crisis  is  nearer  and  nearer  at  hand. 

3.  Notice  the  symmetry  of  John's  composition.  This  is 
apparent  in  the  recurrence  of  certain  characters  and  the 
nice  balancing  of  the  parts.  Nathanael's  name  appears  in 
the  preface  and  the  appendix,  in  the  introductory  chapter 
and  in  the  concluding  chapter,  and  nowhere  else.  The 
mother  of  Jesus  is  seen  only  in  the  beginning  and  at  the  end 
of  the  Gospel.  At  the  opening  of  his  public  ministry  Jesus 
attends  a  feast  with  his  disciples  and  gives  a  demonstration 
of  his  power.  At  the  end  of  his  ministry  he  is  again  at  a 
supper  with  his  disciples,  and  he  gives  to  them  a  demon- 
stration of  his  love. 

4.  Notice  how  this  balancing  of  parts  over  against  each 
other  is  accompanied  by  continuous  contrasts  throughout 
the  narrative.  The  great  contrast  between  faith  and  un- 
belief runs  through  the  whole  book,  and  the  new  characters 
as  they  are  introduced  range  themselves  alternately  between 
believers  and  unbelievers,  friends  and  foes.  First  the  spy- 
ing, critical  representatives  of  the  Pharisees,  then  the  faith- 
ful and  obedient  disciples  of  John.  The  blinded  leaders 
of  the  people  stand  over  against  the  seeing  blind  man  with 
his  bold  witness  to  the  Messiahship  of  Jesus.  The  confes- 
sion of  Peter  contrasts  with  the  betrayal  of  Judas.  The 
raising  of  Lazarus  to  life  results  in  the  dooming  of  Jesus 
to  death.  These  contrasts  occur  in  every  chapter  and  help 
to  give  to  the  narrative  its  striking  variety. 

5.  This  variety  of  treatment  is  noticeable  at  many  points. 
We  instance  only  two.  ( i )  Did  you  ever  notice  the  variety 
of  the  seasons  presented  in  this  Gospel  ?    In  the  beginning 


96  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

of  the  activity  of  Jesus  it  is  the  spring,  the  time  of  the 
sowing  of  seed  and  the  germination  and  growth  of  the 
grain.  Later  in  the  narrative  we  come  upon  the  autumn 
and  the  feast  of  the  ingathering  of  the  fruits  in  the  fall  of 
the  year.  Then  at  the  very  height  of  the  conflict  between 
Jesus  and  the  Jews  we  are  expressly  told  that  it  was  winter. 
Finally,  with  the  resurrection  and  the  glorification  of  Jesus, 
it  is  spring  again.  (2)  A  great  variety  is  added  to  the 
composition  by  the  alternation  of  incident  and  interlude,  of 
story  and  sermon,  of  action  and  discourse.  In  the  begin- 
ning we  have  two  pictures  introducing  the  light  side  and 
the  dark  side  of  the  public  ministry,  the  marriage  feast  at 
Cana  and  the  scourging  of  the  sellers  in  the  temple.  These 
two  vivid  presentations  are  followed  by  two  conversations, 
one  in  the  darkness  of  the  night  and  the  other  in  the  glare 
of  the  full  noonday,  with  Nicodemus  and  with  the  woman 
at  the  well.  Through  the  Gospel  there  is  this  alternation 
of  word  and  deed.  At  the  end  there  are  the  solemn  dis- 
courses with  the  disciples,  followed  by  the  still  more  solemn 
incidents  of  the  trial  and  the  crucifixion.  There  is  a  con- 
stant changing  from  action  to  speech  and  from  the  brighter 
to  the  darker  aspects  of  the  history.  There  is  a  continuous 
variety  which  never  allows  the  interest  to  flag.  It  is  an 
artistic  composition  as  well  as  a  narrative  true  to  the  life. 

6.  The  hand  of  a  master  is  apparent  in  the  general 
grouping  and  the  entire  arrangement  of  the  material  in  this 
Gospel.  John  himself  declares  that  if  all  which  Jesus 
said  and  did  would  be  written,  the  world  could  not  contain 
the  books  filled  with  the  narratives  of  these  things.  Out 
of  this  incalculable  wealth  of  material  John  has  made  a 
selection  of  scenes  and  sermons  which  will  fit  his  purpose 
and  be  most  suitable  to  his  plan.  It  is  in  this  selection 
and  arrangement  of  material  that  the  literary  artist,  as  well 
as  the  saint  and  the  seer,  appears.  He  has  brought  this 
wonderful  fullness  of  words  and  works  into  an  amazingly 
brief  compass.     He  has  omitted  all  which  seemed  to  him 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL  97 

accidental  or  unessential.  He  has  united  the  ideal  moments 
of  the  life  of  Jesus  into  one  harmonious  presentation  of 
the  Ideal  Life.  He  has  made  a  work  of  art  as  well  as  a 
Gospel  of  the  Son  of  God. 

V.     Other  Remarkable  Characteristics 

This  is  surely  a  remarkable  Gospel.  It  is  remarkable  for  /  / 
what  it  omits,  and  it  is  remarkable  for  what  it  adds  to  the  '-7-  v 
Gospel  narrative;  and  it  is  most  remarkable  in  its  artistic 
composition.  Another  feature  distinguishes  it  from  all  the 
synoptics,  i.  It  has  been  called  the  Gospel  of  Apostolic 
Comment.  John  meditates  upon  all  things  which  he  sees 
and  hears,  and  puts  down  his  conclusions  concerning  them. 
We  have  a  commentary  along  with  a  biography.  It  is  the 
commentary  of  the  philosopher  of  the  twelve.  Kaufmann 
calls  John  "the  Plato  of  the  inspired  circle."  It  is  the 
commentary  of  an  apostle,  and  it  is  the  commentary  of  a 
saint. 

Sometimes,  as  in  the  third  chapter,  it  is  difficult,  if  not 
impossible,  to  distinguish  between  the  words  of  Jesus  and 
the  words  of  John.  There  were  no  quotation  marks  in 
these  ancient  manuscripts,  and  without  their  aid  it  some- 
times is  very  difficult  to  determine  where  direct  speech  ends 
and  reflection  upon  it  begins.  This  phenomenon  is  not 
altogether  peculiar  to  John.  A  good  illustration  of  it  is 
found  in  the  second  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians, 
where  Paul  tells  us  that  he  resisted  Peter  to  his  face  and 
said  certain  things  to  him  and  then  goes  on  to  comment 
upon  the  situation  involved.  The  critics  and  commentators 
cannot  agree  as  to  where  the  direct  speech  ends  and  the 
comment  begins.  However,  there  is  more  bewilderment 
of  this  sort  in  the  fourth  Gospel  than  in  any  other  book  of 
the  New  Testament. 

John  tells  us  what  he  has  heard  and  then  what  he  thinks 
of  what  he  has  heard,  and  we  are  at  a  loss  to  know  in 


98  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

many  places  whether  Jesus  or  John  is  speaking.  Is  it  not 
to  the  great  glory  of  his  Master  that  the  disciple  inspired 
by  him  speaks  and  writes  so  gloriously  that  the  words  seem 
almost  like  his  own?  "Matthew's  Gospel  is  the  child  of 
memory;  Mark's  Gospel  is  largely  the  work  of  an  amanu- 
ensis; Luke's  Gospel  is  the  production  of  a  painstaking 
collector  of  oral  and  written  data;  John's  Gospel  is  the 
result  of  the  brooding  of  a  philosophic  mind  over  the  deep 
things  involved  in  the  historical  facts  narrated  by  the  other 
evangelists."^^  Narration  runs  into  reflection,  and  often 
there  is  nothing  to  indicate  where  the  one  ends  and  the 
other  begins.  History  becomes  homily,  and  there  is  no 
clear  dividing  line.  It  all  seems  of  one  piece.  Jesus  talks 
like  John  and  John  talks  like  Jesus. 

Of  course  critics  have  suggested  that  this  fact  proves 
that  the  whole  book  is  the  reflection  of  John's  mind  rather 
than  a  cool  and  historical  and  objective  presentation  of 
actual  truth.  We  have  John  rather  than  Jesus  in  these 
long  conversations  and  discourses,  they  say.  Why  may 
we  not  believe  that  we  have  John  become  like  Jesus  in  this 
book,  so  that  it  is  Jesus  rather  than  John  whose  spirit  is 
apparent  throughout?  Then  it  is  of  little  importance  to  us 
whether  the  words  we  read  were  spoken  directly  by  Jesus 
or  are  appended  to  the  words  of  Jesus  as  an  interpretation 
or  continuation  by  John.  Whether  Jesus  said,  "God  so 
loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that 
whosoever  believeth  on  him  might  not  perish,  but  have 
eternal  life,"  or  whether  John  said  it,  we  know  that  that 
sentence  expresses  the  very  heart  of  the  gospel  message 
and  summarizes  the  whole  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  It  is 
just  as  precious  because  it  is  just  as  true  whether  Jesus 
said  it  or  John.  If  that  is  an  apostolic  comment,  we  do  not 
hesitate  on  that  account  to  reckon  it  one  of  the  choicest 
texts  in  Scripture;  and  we  value  the  Gospel  of  Apostolic 


Teachings  of  the  Books,  p.  76. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL  99 

Comment  in  the  proportion  in  which  it  contains  material 
like  this. 

2.  The  fourth  Gospel  is  remarkable  for  its  spirituality,  j 
Clement  of  Alexandria  called  it  the  "spiritual  gospel."  He 
said,  "John,  last  of  all,  perceiving  that  what  had  reference 
to  the  bodily  was  sufficiently  detailed  in  the  Gospels, 
encouraged  by  his  friends,  and  divinely  incited  by  the 
Spirit,  composed  a  spiritual  gospel."23  The  synoptics  are 
satisfied  to  tell  the  external  incidents  of  the  ministry  of 
Jesus ;  John  is  not  satisfied  until  he  has  reached  some  con- 
clusion as  to  the  inner  and  spiritual  meaning  of  these 
things.  They  are  objective  in  their  treatment  of  their  ma- 
terial ;  John  always  is  subjective  in  his  dealing  with  it. 
They  are  more  concerned  with  the  actions  of  Jesus;  John 
is  more  concerned  with  the  thoughts  of  Jesus.  They  give 
the  foreground  of  the  gospel  picture  and  the  figures  most 
conspicuous  in  it;  John  puts  in  the  background,  stretching 
away  into  the  eternities  and  revealing  the  spiritual  depths 
from  which  all  the  gospel  grace  and  truth  have  come. 

It  is  the  Gospel  of  Spiritual  Insight.  It  has  more  of  the 
words  of  Jesus,  and  the  words  chosen  for  record  are  the 
more  weighty  words  concerning  eternal  life.  "We  must 
read  this  Gospel,"  said  Donald  Eraser,  "while  with  joy,  also 
with  deep  reverence,  for  heaven  lies  about  us,  and  a  cloud 
of  glory  hangs  about  the  page.  .  .  ?*  The  seventeenth 
chapter  of  this  Gospel  has  always  been  regarded  as  a  sort 
of  Holy  of  holies  in  the  Scripture,  so  full  is  it  of  sublime 
thought  and  Divine  intimacy.  Bengel  said  of  it,  'In  its 
words  it  is  the  most  simple,  but  in  its  sense  the  most  pro- 
found in  all  the  Bible.'  "25 

This  spiritual  character  of  the  entire  Gospel  helps  to 
account  for  the  fact  that  John  says  nothing  at  all  about  the 
institution  of  Christian  baptism  or  the  observance  of  the 

23  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.,  vi,  14. 

^*  Lectures  on  the  Bible,  vol.  ii,  p.  74. 

»  Op.  cit.,  p.  85. 


loo  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Lord's  Supper.  John  had  Httle  interest  in  forms  and  cere- 
monies. Institutional  religion  does  not  seem  to  attract  him 
at  all.  Spiritual  experience  and  the  Christlike  life  are  of 
incomparable  importance  with  him.  Liturgies  and  religious 
performances  and  rites  fall  out  of  sight  in  his  writings. 
He  omits  any  mention  of  them  whatever.  He  deals  with 
more  weighty  and  more  worthy  things.  Speaking  generally, 
the  same  thing  is  true  of  the  entire  New  Testament.  There 
is  less  of  prescribed  ceremonial  in  the  whole  New  Testa- 
ment than  in  scores  of  single  chapters  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. John,  however,  represents  this  New  Testament 
tendency  full-grown.  Origen  said  that  no  one  could  under- 
stand the  fourth  Gospel  unless  he  reclined  upon  the  bosom 
of  Jesus  and  thus  became  a  second  John.  One  must  have 
spiritual  insight  to  appreciate  the  spiritual  insight  of  this 
book. 

Much  modern  criticism  is  disposed  to  emphasize  the 
spirituality  of  the  fourth  Gospel  at  the  expense  of  its  his- 
toricity. It  claims  that  the  Gospel  is  a  spiritual  Gospel,  not 
because  it  is  devotional  and  inspirational,  but  because  it 
is  symbolical  and  allegorical.  It  claims  that  the  author  is 
aiming  only  at  an  ideal  reproduction  of  the  general  impres- 
sion made  by  the  life  of  Jesus  and  that  he  is  not  interested 
in  any  merely  historical  details.  In  its  treatment  the  Gospel 
of  Spiritual  Insight  is  apt  to  become  only  the  Gospel  of 
Imaginative  Puerilities.  It  is  amusing  in  the  extreme  to 
find  critics  of  this  school  after  a  labored  and  sober  discus- 
sion of  the  spirituality  of  this  Gospel  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  author  tells  us  that  the  disciples  were  two  hundred 
cubits  from  the  shore  when  the  risen  Lord  appeared  to 
them  at  the  Sea  of  Galilee,  because  Peter  had  that  distance 
to  wade  or  swim  to  reach  the  Master's  feet  and  in  the 
Philonian  lore  two  hundred  signified  "repentance"  !  Or, 
that  he  tells  us  that  the  net  which  they  dragged  to  the  shore 
held  one  hundred  and  fifty  and  three  fishes,  because  that 
number  is  produced  by  adding  together  the  figures  from 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL         loi 

one  up  to  seventeen,  or  by  adding  the  square  of  twelve  to 
the  square  of  three  \^^'  Men  capable  of  such  criticism  are 
incapable  of  any  true  or  deep  appreciation  of  a  spiritual 
gospel  such  as  this  which  John  has  written.  John  is  a 
mystic  and  a  seer,  and  there  are  those  who  never  seem 
able  to  realize  that  there  is  nothing  in  that  fact  inconsistent 
with  his  supreme  loyalty  to  historical  truth. 

A  mystic  may  be  an  honest  man.  Spiritual  insight  is 
perfectly  compatible  with  historical  verity.  With  the  clear- 
ness of  reminiscence  characteristic  of  old  age  John  recalls 
details  like  these  we  have  just  mentioned  without  any 
thought  or  suggestion  of  any  symbolical  significance  in 
them,  but  simply  because  they  are  a  part  of  the  general 
picture  of  the  event  in  his  memory  of  it.  No  writer  in  the 
New  Testament  is  more  devoted  to  the  historical  truth  than 
is  John.  He  believed  that  grace  and  truth  came  by  Jesus 
Christ.2'^  He  was  a  follower  of  Him  who  said,  "I  am  the 
truth."28  He  had  heard  the  Master  pray,  "Sanctify  them  in 
the  truth ;  thy  word  is  truth. "2*^  He  believed  that  Jesus  had 
come  to  bear  witness  to  the  truth,  and  he  believed  that  only 
those  who  were  of  the  truth  would  hear  the  voice  of  Jesus^'^ 
and  fellowship  with  him.  He  believed  that,  according  to  the 
Master's  promise,  the  Spirit  of  truth  would  guide  him  into 
all  the  truth. ^^  Throughout  his  narrative  there  is  all  the 
guilelessness  of  perfect  sincerity,  all  the  simplicity  of  utter 
truthfulness.  On  every  I'age  there  is  the  touch  of  reality. 
The  historical  trustworthiness  of  the  Gospel  has  been 
presented   by   Askwith^^   ^^d   Bleek^^   and   Brooke^'*   and 


26  See  the  article  by  W.  R.  Inge  on  the  Gospel  of  John,  in  the  Dic- 
tionary of  Christ  and  the  Gospels. 

27  John  I.  17. 

28Johni4.  6.  3ojohn  18.37. 

29  John  17.  17.  31  John  16.  13. 

32  The  Historical  Value  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 

33  Introduction,  pp.  agSf,  327f. 

3*  Cambridge  Essays  on  Biblical  Questions,  X. 


I02  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Wendt^s  and  J.  Armitage  Robinson,36  and  they  have  shown 
upon  what  insufficient  grounds  critics  have  concluded  that 
John  invented  his  incidents  to  teach  and  illustrate  his 
theology  while  they  have  pointed  out  the  abundant  reasons 
we  have  to  believe  that  John  speaks  the  truth  when  he  tells 
us  of  the  things  he  himself  claims  to  have  seen  and  heard. 
They  are  ready  to  sign  their  names  to  the  attestation  at  the 
close  of  the  book,  "This  is  the  disciple  that  beareth  witness 
of  these  things,  and  wrote  these  things :  and  we  know  that 
his  witness  is  true."^"^ 

3.  Another  distinguishing  characteristic  of  the  Gospel 
according  to  John  is  its  simplicity  of  expression.  No  one 
of  the  Gospels  is  labored  or  pedantic  or  heavy  in  style,  and 
yet  no  one  of  the  synoptics  equals  the  utter  simplicity  of  the 
Johannine  sentences.  There  is  absolutely  nothing  which 
looks  like  striving  after  effect.  The  most  profound  truths 
are  set  forth  in  the  most  simple  terms.  There  is  no  effort 
and  no  ornament.  All  is  as  simple  as  the  twenty-third 
psalm.  Yet  there  is  an  elevation  in  the  thought,  as  of 
mountain  peaks;  a  loftiness  of  sentiment  and  a  sublimity  of 
atmosphere,  as  in  the  heights.  It  is  easier  to  read  the 
Greek  of  this  Gospel  than  that  of  any  other.  It  is  the  book 
for  beginners  in  the  study  of  the  language.  The  transla- 
tion into  English  represents  the  simplicity  of  its  expression 
in  large  measure.  It  is  the  book  we  put  into  the  hands  of 
new  converts  for  their  first  study  in  the  Scripture.  Chil- 
dren can  comprehend  its  truth.  Catechumens  find  it  full 
of  inspiration  and  blessing.  Yet  it  is  a  strange  fact  that 
it  never  loses  its  charm  with  continued  study  or  with  ad- 
vancing years.  Old  people  enjoy  it  even  more  than  the 
young.  Philosophers  and  profound  theologians  realize  that 
there  are  treasures   here  which  are  not  equaled  on  any 


^  Das  Johannes-Evangelium,  pp.  8f. 

*  The  Historical  Character  of  St.  John's  Gospel. 

''John  21.  24. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        103 

other  pages  of  Scripture  and  which  will  repay  their  closest 
thought  and  reward  their  deepest  meditation. 

4.  We  might  put  that  down  as  another  distinguishing 
characteristic  of  the  fourth  Gospel — its  remarkable  union 
of  clearness  and  profundity  of  revelation.  Strauss  said 
that  John  was  "a  master  of  lucid  obscurity,"  but  John 
never  is  obscure  in  his  writing.  As  far  as  we  can  see,  it  is 
perfectly  clear.  If  we  cannot  see  through  it,  that  is  the 
fault  of  our  sight.  There  is  no  cloudiness  of  thought  and 
no  hindrance  to  our  vision  as  far  as  our  insight  is  capable 
of  discernment.  The  pages  of  the  fourth  Gospel  are  like 
the  waters  of  Lake  Tahoe — crystal  clear  but  of  unfathom- 
able depths.  They  are  like  the  clear  heavens  above  us, 
filled  with  worlds  which  are  hidden  by  the  very  excess  of 
light.  The  child  thinks  he  sees  all  of  them  and  he  rejoices 
in  the  sunshine  and  is  satisfied  with  his  fullness  of  light. 
The  philosopher  and  the  astronomer  know  that  they  see 
only  an  infinitesimal  distance  into  the  infinities  of  the 
celestial  spaces,  and  it  is  their  joy  to  search  and  search, 
that  they  may  see  more  and  more  of  their  exhaustless  full- 
ness of  light.     It  is  thus  with  the  writings  of  John. 

Westcott  says,  "No  writing  perhaps,  if  we  view  it  simply 
as  a  writing,  combines  greater  simplicity  with  more  pro- 
found depths."^^  Philip  SchaflF  says  of  the  fourth  Gospel, 
"No  book  is  so  plain  and  yet  so  deep,  so  natural  and  yet  so 
full  of  mystery.  It  is  .  .  .  deep  as  the  sea  and  high  as  the 
heavens. "2^  It  was  Bishop  Hopkins  who  said  of  the  Bible, 
"It  is  a  ford  wherein  a  lamb  may  wade,  and  a  sea  wherein 
an  elephant  may  swim";  and  "that  rare  scholar"  Robert 
Boyle  said  of  the  Word  of  God,  "It  is  a  matchless  volume ; 
it  is  impossible  that  we  can  study  it  too  much,  or  esteem  it 
too  highly."  These  sayings  can  be  applied  to  the  Gospel 
according  to  John  in  fullest  measure. 

Adolph  Saphir  has  written  an  appreciation  of  the  spirit 

38  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  p.  255. 
3»  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  vol.  i,  p.  688. 


I04  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

and  the  style  of  John  in  these  words :  "There  is  a  simplicity 
which  is  the  result  of  full  and  profound  knowledge,  of 
varied  experience  and  conflict;  a  simplicity  which  is  the 
indication  of  abundance  and  depth,  which  is  the  result  of 
meditation,  prayerfulness,  and  a  humble  walk  with  God. 
They  who  are  fathers  in  the  church,  who,  like  the  apostle 
John,  lean  on  the  bosom  of  Jesus,  who  behold  the  glory  of 
the  Only-Begotten,  and  in  singleness  of  heart  rest  in  his 
love,  reach  a  lofty  and  calm  mountain  height,  and  they 
express  their  knowledge  and  experience  with  great  sim- 
plicity and  brevity.  We  often  fancy  we  understand  their 
quiet  and  axiomatic  words,  or  that  we  have  fathomed  their 
meaning,  and  yet  we  may  only  have  come  into  contact  with 
the  surface.  The  apostle  John  is  thus  the  simplest  and 
deepest  teacher  in  the  church.  Like  the  Sabbath  day,  he 
appears  among  the  disciples;  a  solemn,  yet  childlike  quiet 
and  simplicity  characterize  his  words ;  we  meet  with  no 
complicated  arguments,  no  noise  and  struggle,  no  upward 
steep  ascent  from  earth  to  heaven,  law  to  grace,  Levitical 
type  to  Melchizedek  perfection;  we  are  transplanted  at 
once  into  the  high  region  of  God's  light,  love,  life.  These 
simple  yet  inexhaustible  words  are  the  constantly  recurring 
realities  of  which  he  testifies.  To  reach  this  simplicity  is 
the  object  of  the  Christian  individual  and  of  the  Christian 
Church."'**^  Simplicity,  clearness,  and  profundity — these 
are  the  three  principal  characteristics  of  the  revelation  of 
this  remarkable  book. 

5.  John  has  a  most  remarkable  literary  style.  We  will 
note  some  of  its  peculiarities.  ( i )  A  fondness  for  choice 
words.  John  has  a  comparatively  limited  vocabulary.  He 
uses  the  same  words  again  and  again.  These  words,  how- 
ever, are  choice  words,  capable  of  a  great  variety  of  mean- 
ings and  uses.  So  that  Simcox  declares :  "John  has  imper- 
fect command  of  Greek  idiom,  but  a  very  adequate  com- 


*o  Saphir,  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  vol.  i,  pp.  305,  306. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        105 

mand  of  the  Greek  vocabulary.  He  frames  his  sentences 
as  he  can,  but  he  chooses  his  words  as  he  will."'*^ 

As  examples  of  the  words  characteristic  of  the  Johan- 
nine  vocabulary  we  subjoin  the  following,  with  the  number 
of  times  they  are  used  in  the  Gospel :  odg^,  flesh,  eight  times ; 
oKoria,  darkness,  nine  times  ;  orjjidov,  sign,  seventeen  times ; 
^evEiv, to  remain,  eighteen  times;  Kpiveiv, to  judge,  nineteen 
times ;  tpyov,  work,  twenty-three  times ;  (pojg,  light,  twenty- 
three  times ;  decjgelv^  to  behold,  twenty-three  times.  This 
verb  is  found  only  fifteen  times  in  all  the  synoptics  put 
together.  John  is  the  Apostle  of  Insight,  and  this  verb 
is  a  favorite  with  him.  "Ovojia,  name,  occurs  twenty-five 
times ;  dXTjdeca,  truth,  twenty-five  times ;  66^a,  glory,  and 
do^d^eodai,  to  glory,  forty-two  times ;  jt/aprvpZa,  witness,  and 
fiaQTvpelv, to  witness,  forty-seven  times;  ^w?7,life,  andC^/v,  to 
live,  fifty-two  times;  yivcjoKeiv,  to  know,  fifty-five  times; 
/cdcTjwo?, world,  seventy-eight  times,  while  in  all  the  synoptics 
it  occurs  only  fifteen  times.  Uiareieiv,  to  believe,  occurs 
ninety-eight  times  in  the  fourth  Gospel — twice  as  often 
as  in  all  the  synoptics  put  together.  This  is  all  the  more 
remarkable  when  we  remember  that  the  noun  TTiorig,  faith 
or  belief,  is  not  found  in  the  Gospel  at  all. 

These  words  belong  to  John's  carefully  chosen,  specially 
prized,  and  constantly  used  treasury  of  important  terms. 
He  prefers  them  to  others.  He  repeats  them  as  often  as 
he  chooses.  He  rings  the  changes  upon  them  from  the 
beginning  to  the  end  of  his  book.  They  represent  spiritual 
realities  to  him.  They  have  a  great  depth  of  meaning  and 
are  capable  of  development  along  many  lines  of  thought. 

(2)  As  with  words,  so  with  ideas.  Certain  ideas  seem 
to  cling  to  certain  persons  or  things  in  John's  mind.  We 
may  call  this  peculiarity,  fondness  for  a  refrain.  When- 
ever the  relatives  of  Jesus  are  mentioned,  something  is  said 
about  his  "hour."     Whenever  the   rulers  are  introduced. 


*^  The  Writers  of  the  New  Testament,  p.  74. 


io6  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

their  "unbelief"  is  emphasized.  Whenever  Judas  appears, 
his  betrayal  is  recalled  and  something  is  said  about  "Satan" 
or  "the  devil."  If  John  the  Baptist  comes  into  view,  his 
testimony  is  immediately  mentioned ;  it  is  always  as  a  wit- 
ness that  he  appears.  In  every  decisive  moment  Jesus 
utters  the  refrain,  "I  am — ,"  Whether  as  a  word  of  com- 
fort or  as  a  word  of  authority  it  comes  in  again  and  again 
like  the  motif  of  a  symphony.  These  refrains  recur  in 
every  part  of  the  narrative,  and  stand  as  finger-posts  point- 
ing out  the  course  of  thought  or  boundary  stones  marking 
the  chief  divisions  of  the  book.  They  show  that  in  John's 
mind  in  connection  with  every  figure  and  every  scene  the 
central  fact  or  significance  of  it  absorbed  his  attention  to 
the  exclusion  of  every  other  thing.  He  was  as  single  in 
thought  as  he  was  single  in  heart.  That  was  essential  to 
the  making  of  a  Boanerges. 

(3)  We  notice,  as  a  third  peculiarity,  a  fondness  for  the 
mystic  numbers  three  and  seven.  Farrar  says,  "Almost  all 
the  subsections  of  the  Gospel  run  in  triplets,"^^  j^^d  then 
he  quotes  from  Keim,  "Jesus  is  thrice  in  Galilee,  thrice  in 
Judaea,  twice  three  feasts  take  place  during  his  ministry, 
and  particularly  three  passover  feasts — in  the  beginning, 
the  middle,  the  end — which  either  foretell  or  procure  his 
death.  He  works  three  miracles  in  Galilee  and  three  in 
Jerusalem.  Twice  three  days  is  he  in  the  neighborhood 
of  John ;  three  days  are  covered  by  the  narrative  of  Lazarus, 
and  six  by  the  fatal  passover.  He  utters  three  sayings  on 
the  cross,  and  appears  thrice  after  his  resurrection."  Holtz- 
mann  adds  these  triplets  to  the  list:  "The  Prologue  begins 
with  three  propositions ;  three  divisions  are  expressly  made 
of  the  discourse  on  the  last  day  of  Tabernacles;  three  dis- 
closures of  the  traitor  are  made  by  Jesus ;  three  times  he  is 
himself  condemned;  three  times  Pilate  attempts  to  save 
him ;  three  days  he  lies  in  the  tomb."^^ 

"  Messages  of  the  Books,  p.  112. 
*3  Einleitung,  p.  438. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        107 

Seven  times  in  this  Gospel  the  Lord  says,  "I  am — " :  *T 
am  the  bread  of  life"  (6.  48)  ;  "I  am  the  light  of  the  world" 
(8.  12)  ;  "I  am  the  door  of  the  sheep"  (10.  7)  ;  'T  am  the 
good  shepherd"  (10.  11)  ;  "I  am  the  resurrection  and  the 
life"  (11.  25);  "I  am  the  way,  and  the  truth,  and  the 
life"  (14.  6);  "I  am  the  true  vine"  (15.  i).  Only  seven 
apostles  are  mentioned  by  name  in  this  Gospel,  if  we  except 
Judas,  who  seems  in  John's  representation  to  stand  alone, 
outside  the  sacred  number.  Seven  of  the  apostles  go  fish- 
ing after  the  crucifixion,  and  that  perfect  number  meet  the 
Lord  and  are,  like  Peter,  recommissioned  for  service. 

Westcott  says,  "It  is  not  fanciful  to  see  a  significance  in 
the  number  of  miracles"  recorded  in  this  Gospel.  There 
are  seven  in  Christ's  ministry,  and  an  eighth  after  the  resur- 
rection. To  the  Hebrew  seven  was  the  figure  of  the  com- 
plete and  perfect  whole,  and  eight  was  the  figure  of  the 
resurrection  or  the  new  birtli,^*  Some  of  these  suggestions 
may  be  open  to  criticism ;  but  it  is  true  that  the  Hebrew 
mind  delighted  in  these  symbolic  numbers  to  a  degree 
almost  incomprehensible  in  the  Occident ;  and  there  are 
enough  of  these  numbers  in  the  arrangement  of  John's 
material  to  show  that  he  was  a  true  Hebrew  at  this  point. 

Looking  the  Gospel  through  carefully  we  find  that  there 
are  seven  witnesses  cited  for  the  validity  of  the  claims  of 
Jesus :  the  witness  of  the  forerunner,  John  the  Baptist 
(i-  7>  5-  33) >  the  witness  of  the  Father  (5.  34,  37),  the 
witness  of  the  Son  (8.  14;  iS.  37),  the  witness  of  the 
works  (5.  36;  10.  25),  the  witness  of  the  Scripture  (5.  39- 
46),  the  witness  of  the  Spirit  (15.  26;  16.  14),  the  witness 
of  the  disciples  (15.  27;  19.  35). 

There  are  seven  noteworthy  confessions  of  faith  peculiar 
to  this  Gospel :  John  the  Baptist's  "Behold  the  Lamb  of 
God"  (i.  29)  ;  Andrew's  "We  have  found  the  Messiah" 
(i.  41);  Nathanael's  "Rabbi,  thou  art  the  Son  of  God" 


"  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Gospels,  p.  284,  n. 


io8  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

(i.  49);  the  report  of  the  officers  sent  to  arrest  him, 
"Never  man  so  spake"  (7.  46)  ;  the  bhnd  man's  profession, 
"Lord  I  believe"  [that  Jesus  was  the  Son  of  God]  (9.  38)  ; 
Martha's  cry  of  faith,  "I  have  beHeved  that  thou  art  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God"  (11.  27)  ;  and  last  of  all  Thomas's 
triumph  over  every  doubt  in  the  exclamation  of  adoring 
faith  and  love,  "My  Lord  and  my  God"  (20.  28).  Did  it 
just  happen  that  the  number  seven  occurs  in  all  these  cases? 
It  is  strange  that  it  happens  so  many  times,  so  strange  that 
the  probability  would  seem  to  be  that  it  is  no  happening, 
but,  rather,  that  it  is  intentional.  This  fondness  for  He- 
braic number  grouping  becomes  all  the  more  likely  when 
we  notice  other  Hebraistic  characteristics  in  the  style  of 
John. 

(4)  Schaff  points  out  that  in  this  Gospel  "the  parallelism 
of  Hebrew  poetry  is  very  apparent  in  such  double  sentences 
as :  'Peace  I  leave  with  you ;  my  peace  I  give  unto  you' 
(14.  27)  ;  'A  servant  is  not  greater  than  his  lord;  neither 
one  that  is  sent  greater  than  he  that  sent  him'  (13.  16)  ; 
'All  things  were  made  through  him ;  and  without  him  was 
not  anything  made  that  hath  been  made'  (i.  3).  Examples 
of  antithetic  parallelism  are  also-  frequent:  "The  light 
shineth  in  the  darkness ;  and  the  darkness  apprehended  it 
not"  (i.  5);  "He  was  in  the  world,  .  .  .  and  the  world 
knew  him  not"  (i.  10);  "He  confessed,  and  denied  not" 
(i.  20);  "I  give  unto  them  eternal  life;  and  they  shall 
never  perish"  (10.  28)."*^ 

(5)  There  are  Hebraistic  forms  of  expression.  The 
verb  "to  know"  is  made  to  express  spiritual  union.  The 
phrases  "to  be  in"  or  "to  abide  in"  express  moral  depend- 
ence. These  are  pure  Hebraisms.  "To  rejoice  with  rejoic- 
ing" and  the  Greek  phrase  for  "forever"  are  Hebraic  in 
origin.  Twenty-five  times  in  this  Gospel  and  nowhere  else 
in  the  New  Testament  we  find  Jesus  beginning  his  speech 


*^  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  p.  699. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        109 

with  a  "Verily,  verily."  This  is  the  double  Hebrew  "Amen, 
amen." 

(6)  John  is  Hebrew  again  in  his  liking  for  straightfor- 
ward constructions.  The  Greek  delighted  in  logical  de- 
velopment and  in  subtle  connections  of  thought.  The  He- 
brew preferred  simplicity  of  statement.  The  Greek 
language  has  a  multitude  of  particles  to  assist  in  the  ex- 
pression of  the  relation  of  the  several  portions  of  an 
intricate  sentence  to  the  central  thought.  For  the  most 
part  John  ignores  all  help  of  this  sort.  He  uses  a  very 
few  of  these  particles  and  usually  is  content  with  the 
simple  conjunction  Kai,  "and."  He  adds  sentences  to  each 
other  rather  than  connects  them  with  each  other.  Instead 
of  saying,  "The  light  shineth  in  the  darkness ;  but  the  dark- 
ness apprehended  it  not"  (i.  5),  he  says,  "The  light  shineth 
in  the  darkness ;  and  the  darkness  apprehended  it  not."  In- 
stead of  saying,  "Though  Jesus  was  in  the  world,  yet  the 
world  knew  him  not"  (i.  10),  he  says,  "He  was  in  the 
world,  .  .  .  and  the  world  knew  him  not."  Instead  of 
saying,  "We  bear  witness  of  that  which  we  have  seen,  but 
ye  receive  not  our  witness"  (3.  11),  he  says,  "We  .  .  .  bear 
witness  of  that  which  we  have  seen ;  and  ye  receive  not 
our  witness."  Instead  of  saying,  "Jesus  taught  in  the 
temple  publicly  and  openly,  and  yet,  though  it  was  so  easy 
to  do  it,  no  one  laid  hands  on  him"  (8.  20),  he  says,  "He 
taught  in  the  temple :  and  no  man  took  him." 

It  is  comparatively  easy  to  wante  Greek  in  this  fashion, 
and  in  the  fourth  Gospel  the  Greek  is  comparatively  good, 
but  it  is  all  of  this  unambitious,  straightforward  sort.  John 
writes  Greek  after  the  Hebrew  style  and  he  does  not  involve 
himself  in  any  difficulties  because  he  moves  along  straight 
lines  and  confines  himself  to  the  simplest  constructions.  It 
is  correct  but  kindergarten  Greek.  John  writes  in  Greek, 
but  thinks  in  Hebrew.  He  chooses  good  words  and  writes 
good  sentences,  but  they  are  of  the  kind  which  any  begin- 
ner might  construct. 


no  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

These  Hebrew  sacred  numbers,  Hebrews  parallelisms, 
Hebrew  forms  of  expression,  and  Hebrew  constructions 
indicate  clearly  enough  that  the  writer  of  the  fourth  Gospel, 
though  he  used  the  Greek  language,  was  himself  a  Hebrew, 
accustomed  to  Hebrew  literature,  and  with  Hebrew  habits 
of  thought.  Nothing  could  be  farther  astray  than  Kenan's 
judgment  that  the  style  of  this  Gospel  "has  nothing  He- 
brew, nothing  Jewish,  nothing  Talmudic."  Ewald  states 
the  truth  when  he  says,  "In  its  true  spirit  and  afflatus,  no 
language  can  be  more  genuinely  Hebrew  than  that  of 
John."  Godet  says:  "Though  Greek  in  its  forms,  the  style 
is  nevertheless  Hebrew  in  its  substance.  ...  In  the  lan- 
guage of  John,  the  clothing  only  is  Greek,  the  body  is 
Hebrew;  or,  as  Luthardt  says,  there  is  a  Hebrew  soul  in 
the  Greek  language  of  the  evangelist."^^  Schaff  discusses 
the  style  of  the  fourth  Gospel  and  concludes,  "It  is  pure 
Greek  in  vocabulary  and  grammar,  but  thoroughly  Hebrew 
in  temper  and  spirit,  even  more  so  than  any  other  book, 
and  can  be  almost  literally  translated  into  Hebrew  without 
losing  its  force  or  beauty."^'^ 

VI.     Occasion  and  Aim 

What  was  the  occasion  which  led  John  to  write  this 
fourth  Gospel?  i.  The  first  answer  ever  given  to  that  ques- 
tion in  the  literature  of  the  early  church  is  found  in  the 
Muratorian  Fragment,  whose  date  probably  is  about  A.  D. 
170.  The  writer  of  the  Fragment  says  that  John  wrote  at 
the  request  of  his  fellow  disciples  and  bishops  in  Asia 
Minor.  His  account  is  as  follows :  "At  their  entreaties 
John  said,  Fast  with  me  for  three  days  from  this  time,  and 
whatever  shall  be  revealed  to  each  of  us,  let  us  relate  it 
to  one  another.  On  the  same  night  it  was  revealed  to 
Andrew,  one  of  the  apostles,  that  John  should  relate  all 


*^  Commentary  on  John,  p.  138. 
*''  Op.  cil.,  p.  690. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        in 

things  in  his  own  name,  aided  by  the  revision  of  all.  .  .  . 
What  wonder  is  it,  then,  that  John  brings  forward  each 
detail  with  so  much  emphasis  even  in  his  epistles,  saying 
of  himself,  'What  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes  and  heard 
with  our  ears  and  our  hands  have  handled,  these  things 
have  we  written  to  you'?  For  so  he  professes  that  he 
was  not  only  an  eyewitness,  but  also  a  hearer,  and,  more- 
over, a  historian  of  all  the  wonderful  works  of  the  Lord 
in  order."-*^ 

2.  A  somewhat  different  reason  for  John's  writing  is 
given  by  Jerome  in  the  Preface  to  his  Commentary  on 
Matthew:  "The  last  [of  the  Gospel  writers]  is  John,  the 
apostle  and  evangelist,  whom  Jesus  loved  most,  who,  reclin- 
ing upon  the  Lord's  bosom,  drank  the  purest  streams  of 
doctrine.  .  .  .  When  he  was  in  Asia,  at  the  time  when  the 
seeds  of  heresy  were  springing  up  (I  refer  to  Cerinthus, 
Ebion,  and  the  rest  who  say  that  Christ  has  not  come  in 
the  flesh,  whom  he  in  his  own  epistle  calls  Anti-Christs, 
and  whom  the  apostle  Paul  frequently  assails),  he  was 
urged  by  almost  all  the  bishops  of  Asia  then  living,  and 
by  deputations  from  many  churches,  to  write  more  pro- 
foundly concerning  the  divinity  of  the  Saviour,  and  to 
break  through  all  obstacles  so  as  to  attain  to  the  very  Word 
of  God  (if  I  may  so  speak)  with  a  boldness  as  successful 
as  it  appears  audacious.  Ecclesiastical  history  relates  that, 
when  he  was  urged  by  the  brethren  to  write,  he  replied  that 
he  would  do  so  if  a  general  fast  were  proclaimed  and  all 
would  offer  up  prayer  to  God ;  and  when  the  fast  was  over, 
the  narrative  goes  on  to  say,  being  filled  with  revelation 
[revelatione  saturatus,  "having  been  saturated  with  revela- 
tion"], he  burst  into  the  heaven-sent  Preface,  In  the  begin- 
ning was  the  Word,  and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and  the 
Word  was  God :  this  was  in  the  beginning  with  God."'*^ 


*8  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  v,  p.  603. 

"  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  Second  Series,  vol.  vi,  p.  495. 


112  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

The  writer  of  the  Muratorian  Fragment  suggested  no 
other  reason  for  John's  writing  than  that  his  friends  and 
disciples  desired  him  to  put  into  permanent  form  the  teach- 
ing they  had  come  to  value  so  highly;  for  they  esteemed 
him  the  fittest  medium  of  the  gospel  revelation  to  be  found 
in  the  apostolic  company.  It  is  interesting  to  note  the 
occurrence  of  Andrew's  name  in  this  connection.  It  was 
Andrew,  according  to  the  story  told  in  the  first  chapter  of 
this  Gospel,  who  was  with  John  when  the  two  first  ap- 
proached Jesus.  It  is  Andrew,  according  to  the  story  told 
in  this  tradition,  who  is  with  John  in  his  old  age  here  in 
Ephesus  and  to  whom  the  divine  indication  is  given  that 
it  was  the  will  of  God  that  John  should  write  as  the  church 
desired.  The  two  names  are  joined  in  this  way  at  the 
very  beginning  and  at.  the  very  end  of  their  gospel  ministry. 
Evidently  it  is  this  tradition  upon  which  Jerome  builds  his 
statement,  but  he  adds  that  it  was  the  growth  of  heresy 
in  their  neighborhood  which  led  the  church  officials  to 
present  this  request  to  John.  The  Gospel  was  written,  he 
says,  not  only  to  be  a  medium  of  revelation  but  also  to  be 
a  weapon  of  defense.  It  was  to  be  didactic  and  it  was  to 
be  polemic  as  well.^^' 

3.  Eusebius,  in  his  Church  History,  suggests  a  third  rea- 
son for  John's  writing,  namely,  that  of  supplementing  the 
imperfect  accounts  given  by  the  synoptics.  He  says :  "The 
three  Gospels  already  mentioned  having  come  into  the 
hands  of  all  and  into  his  own  too,  they  say  that  John  ac- 
cepted them  and  bore  witness  to  their  truthfulness ;  but 
that  there  was  lacking  in  them  an  account  of  the  deeds 
done  by  Christ  at  the  beginning  of  his  ministry.  .  .  .  They 
say,  therefore,  that  the  apostle  John,  being  asked  to  do  it 
for  this  reason,  gave  in  his  Gospel  an  account  of  the  period 


^°  Irenseus,  Adv.  Haer.,  Ill,  ii,  i,  had  suggested  that  John  wrote  to 
"remove  the  error"  of  Cerinthus  and  the  Nicolaitanes.  Erasmus, 
Hengstenberg,  Grotius,  Hug,  De  Wette,  Ebrard,  Ewald,  Lange,  and 
Alford  lay  emphasis  on  the  polemical  design  of  the  Gospel. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        113 

which  had  been  omitted  by  the  earlier  evangelists,  and  of 
the  deeds  done  by  the  Saviour  during  that  period."^^ 

It  is  evident  that  these  three  reasons  are  not  necessarily 
inconsistent  with  each  other.  John  may  have  been  re- 
quested to  write  a  Gospel  in  which  he  would  be  a  teacher, 
a  polemic,  and  a  historian.  Those  who  heard  him  may 
have  considered  his  teaching  too  valuable  to  be  lost  when 
he  died,  and  one  reason  for  that  may  have  been  that  it 
contained  so  much  which  the  synoptics  did  not  mention 
and  so  much  which  was  opposed  to  the  heretical  perver- 
sions of  the  truth  which  some  already  were  venturing  to 
promulgate  in  the  church.  John  may  have  had  all  of 
these  things  in  mind  as  he  composed  this  fourth  Gospel. 
He  may  have  aimed  to  give  a  supplementary,  a  more  spirit- 
ual, a  more  serviceable  account  of  the  life  of  Jesus,  one 
which  would  present  the  truth  of  that  life  more  faithfully 
and  one  which  would  refute  all  errors  concerning  that  life 
in  so  doing. 

I.  He  states  his  aim  in  writing  in  the  closing  words  of 
the  Gospel :  "Many  other  signs  therefore  did  Jesus  in  the 
presence  of  the  disciples,  which  are  not  written  in  this 
book:  but  these  are  written,  that  ye  may  believe  that  Jesus 
is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God;  and  that  believing  ye  may  Z' 
have  life  in  his  name."^^  This  is  the  authoritative  state- 
ment of  the  aim  of  the  Gospel.  We  add  two  other  state- 
ments as  probably  the  best  conclusions  of  scholarship  on 
this  subject.  2.  Bernhard  Weiss  said:  "The  aim  is  to  set 
forth  the  glory  of  the  divine  Logos,  as  John  had  beheld  it 
in  the  earthly  life  of  Jesus,  as  it  had  more  and  more  mag- 
nificently revealed  itself  in  conflict  with  unbelieving  and 
hostile  Judaism,  and  as  it  had  led  receptive  souls  to  a  faith 
ever  more  firm  and  to  a  contemplation  ever  more  blessed. 


"  Eusebius,  Church  History,  III,  24.  Michaelis,  Beyschlag,  West- 
cott,  and  Salmon  believe  that  the  Gospel  was  intended  to  supplement 
the  synoptic  accotmts. 

^  John  20.  30,  31. 


114  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

This  is  what  the  evangelist  desires."^^  That  statement 
recalls  the  words  of  John  i.  14,  "We  beheld  his  glory," 
or,  more  literally:  "We  theatrized  his  glory.  We  gazed 
upon  it  with  all  the  absorbing  interest  and  with  all  the  rapt 
attention  and  with  all  the  conscious  delight  with  which  men 
enjoy  the  best  and  highest  type  of  theatrical  representa- 
tion." It  was  such  a  drama  as  this  old  Globe  Theater  never 
had  seen  before,  and  the  glory  of  it  had  filled  John's  eyes. 
Something  of  that  glory  he  has  been  able  to  put  into  his 
written  page.  3.  Luthardt  said:  "John  would  picture 
Christ  as  the  Son  of  God  in  the  absolute  sense;  that  is,  as 
the  one  who  has  come  from  God  himself  and  who  stands 
in  absolute  God-fellowship.  All  the  fullness  of  the  divine 
life  is  in  him  and  is  communicated  through  him.  He  is 
therefore  the  object  of  the  faith  which  is  absolutely  neces- 
sary to  salvation."^* 

VII.    Contents 

The  Central  Thought  of  the  Gospel  is  the  incarnation, 
the  Word  become  flesh,  the  Son  of  God  as  the  Son  of  man. 
The  Central  Figure  of  the  Gospel  is  that  of  Jesus  the 
Divine  Revealer  and  the  Human  Brother  throughout. 
Jesus  is  in  the  midst  and  on  either  side  two.  Faith  and  Un- 
belief. Here  are  The  Three  Factors  which  make  up  the 
entire  composition.  All  that  John  says  is  to  show  how 
and  why  some  believed  in  the  claims  and  the  teachings  of 
Jesus,  and  also  how  and  why  others  refused  to  believe. 
The  reasons  for  faith,  the  possibilities  of  faith,  the  develop- 
ment of  faith  are  pictured  on  the  one  hand  and  the  sin 
and  suicide  of  unbelief  are  pictured  in  their  development 
and  sad  fruition  on  the  other  hand.  Jesus  is  God  incar- 
nate. The  Father  was  in  him  and  spoke  through  him. 
Jesus  represents  the  highest  reach  of  the  Divine  revelation. 

^  From  notes  taken  in  lecture  room  in  Berlin. 
"  From  notes  taken  in  lecture  room  in  Leipsic. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        115 

Faith  in  him,  therefore,  is  an  absolute  necessity  to  perfect 
salvation. 

There  is  more  of  Jesus  in  the  fourth  Gospel  than  there 
was  in  the  synoptics.  The  keynote  in  them  was  the  king- 
dom of  God;  the  keynote  in  John  is  the  Son  of  God.  In 
the  synoptics  Jesus  speaks  much  about  the  Kingdom  and 
its  claims,  and  he  says  comparatively  little  about  himself 
and  his  claims.  In  John  he  says  comparatively  little  about 
the  Kingdom  and  its  claims,  and  he  talks  much  about  him- 
self and  his  claims.  In  the  synoptics  his  speeches  often 
begin  with  the  words,  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like  unto 
this  or  that.  In  John  these  words  do  not  occur,  but  we 
hear  Jesus  saying  again  and  again,  "I  am  the  Bread,  the 
Door,  the  Good  Shepherd,"  and  so  on.  There  it  is  "the 
Kingdom" ;  here  it  is  "I."  To  John  the  person  of  Jesus 
is  of  central  and  supreme  importance.  All  the  interests 
of  the  Kingdom,  in  earth  and  heaven,  depend  upon  him. 

Upon  these  three  factors,  the  Divine  Manifestation  in 
Jesus,  faith  in  him,  and  unbelief  manifesting  itself  in  hos- 
tility to  him,  we  build  our  Outline  of  the  contents  of  the 
fourth  Gospel:  i.  The  prologue,  presenting  Jesus  as  the 
Logos  revelation  in  human  flesh  (i.  1-18).  2.  Jesus  re- 
reals  himself  as  the  Messiah  (i.  19  to  4.  54).  3.  The 
growing  revelation,  together  with  the  growing  faith  of  the 
disciples  and  the  growing  unbelief  of  the  Jews  (chapters 
5-12).  4.  Faith  consummated;  the  last  discourses  with  the 
disciples,  and  Judas  expelled  (chapters  13-17).  5.  Unbe- 
lief of  the  Jews  consummated  in  the  arrest,  trial,  and  cruci- 
fixion of  Jesus  (chapters  18,  19).  6.  The  resurrection 
appearances  in  Jerusalem.  The  perfect  triumph  of  faith 
when  doubting  Thomas  believes  (chapter  20).  7.  The 
Epilogue.  Appearance  at  the  sea  of  Tiberias,  and  the  attes- 
tation (chapter  21), 

We  suggest  the  following  chapter  and  paragraph  outline, 
the  paragraphs  being  those  of  the  American  Revised  Ver- 
sion. 


ii6  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

1.  The  Chapter  of  Beginnings.  There  are  three  clearly 
distinguishable  subjects  treated  in  this  chapter;  first,  the 
Logos  doctrine,  "In  the  beginning  was  the  Word" ;  second, 
the  witness  of  John  the  Baptist;  and,  third,  the  First 
Disciples.  Subdividing  the  second  and  third  heads  into 
two  paragraphs  each,  we  have  five  paragraphs  in  the  chap- 
ter, as  follows :  ( i )  The  Logos  Revelation  through  Incar- 
nation. (2)  The  witness  of  John  the  Baptist  to  his  own 
relation  to  the  Messianic  movement.  (3)  The  witness  of 
the  Baptist  to  the  Person  of  the  Messias.  (4)  Andrew, 
John,  and  Peter.     (5)   Philip  and  Nathanael. 

2.  The    Beginning   of    Signs.      (i)  The   Cana   miracle. 

(2)  Capernaum  .  visited.  (3)  Cleansing  of  the  temple. 
(4)  Confidence  refused. 

3.  Nicodemus  chapter,  (i)  Conversation  of  Nicodemus 
with  Jesus.  (2)  Comments  by  the  evangelist  John.  (3) 
Conversation  of  John  the  Baptist  with  his  disciples.  (4) 
Comments  by  the  evangelist  John. 

4.  The  Woman  at  the  Well  chapter,  (i)  Conversation 
of  the  woman  with  Jesus.  (2)  Conversation  of  the  disciples 
with  Jesus.  (3)  The  Samaritan  revival.  (4)  Jesus  goes 
from  Samaria  into  Galilee.  (5)  Healing  of  the  noble- 
man's son. 

5.  The  Sabbath  chapter,  (i)  Jesus  goes  to  a  Jerusalem 
feast.     (2)   He  heals  an  impotent  man  on  the  Sabbath  day. 

(3)  He  defends  himself  against  the  charge  of  Sabbath- 
breaking.  (4)  He  preaches  a  Sabbath  sermon,  declaring 
that  the  power  of  life  and  judgment  is  given  to  the  Son, 
and  (5)   proclaiming  the  fourfold  witness  to  himself. 

6.  The  Bread  of  Life  chapter,  (i)  Jesus  feeds  the  five 
thousand.  (2)  He  withdraws  into  the  mountain.  (3)  He 
walks  upon  the  sea.  (4)  He  preaches  in  the  synagogue  at 
Capernaum  that  he  is  the  bread  of  life.  (5)  The  Jews 
murmur  and  he  tells  them  that  the  bread  he  will  give  is 
his  flesh.  (6)  The  Jews  debate  this  statement,  and  he  tells 
them  they  must  eat  his  flesh  and  drink  his  blood.      (7) 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        117 

The  disciples  murmur,  and  he  tells  them  the  flesh  profiteth 
nothing,  for  it  is  the  spirit  that  gives  life.  (8)  Many 
disciples  desert  him,  but  Peter  confesses  that  he  is  the  Holy 
One  of  God. 

7.  The  Feast  of  Tabernacles  chapter.  ( i )  Jesus  refuses 
to  go  with  his  brethren  to  the  feast.  (2)  He  goes  in 
secret  and  hears  the  questioning  of  the  multitude  concern- 
ing him.  (3)  He  teaches  publicly  in  the  temple,  and 
defends  himself.  (4)  The  multitude  divided  in  opinion 
about  him.  (5)  On  the  last  day  of  the  feast  Jesus  cries, 
"If  any  man  thirst,  let  him  come  unto  me  and  drink." 
(6)  The  officers  sent  to  arrest  him  declare,  "Never  man  so 
spake." 

8.  The  Light  of  the  World  chapter,  (i)  The  woman 
taken  in  adultery.  (2)  Jesus  proclaims  himself  the  light 
of  the  world.  (3)  He  foretells  his  going  away  and  his 
lifting  up.  (4)  Controversy  concerning  Abraham.  The 
Jews  claim  to  be  the  children  of  Abraham  and  Jesus  says 
they  are  the  children  of  the  devil,  for  they  do  not  have 
Abraham's  spirit  and  they  do  not  do  Abraham's  works. 

9.  The  Blind  Man  chapter,  (i)  Jesus  heals  a  man  blind 
from  birth.  (2)  The  blind  man  is  brought  before  the 
Pharisees  and  is  cast  out  of  the  synagogue.  (3)  He  meets 
Jesus  and  confesses  him  to  be  Lord. 

10.  The  Good  Shepherd  chapter,  (i)  Jesus  talks  of  the 
sheep  fold.     (2)   He  declares  himself  the  door  of  the  sheep. 

(3)  The  Jews  dispute  as  to  whether  he  is  a  demoniac  or 
divine.  (4)  At  the  feast  of  the  dedication  Jesus  talks  of 
his  sheep,  and  the  Jews  would  stone  him,  and  he  defends 
himself  from  the  charge  of  blasphemy.  (5)  Jesus  goes 
beyond  Jordan. 

11.  The  Lazarus  chapter,  (i)  The  death  of  Lazarus. 
(2)  The  resurrection  of  Lazarus.    (3)   Many  Jews  believe. 

(4)  The  chief  priests  and  Pharisees  in  council  decide  to 
put  Jesus  to  death.     (5)  Jesus  withdraws  to  Ephraim. 

12.  The  Last  Public  Events  of  the  Ministry  of  Jesus,    (i) 


ii8  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

The  anointing  at  Bethany,  (2)  The  chief  priests  decide  to 
put  both  Jesus  and  Lazarus  to  death.  (3)  The  triumphal 
entry.  (4)  The  visit  of  the  Greeks,  and  the  last  public 
discourse  of  Jesus.  (5)  Comments  by  the  evangelist  John. 
(6)  Summary  of  the  preaching  of  Jesus. 

13.  The  Last  Supper  chapter,  (i)  Jesus  washes  the 
disciples'  feet.  (2)  Lessons  of  this  incident.  (3)  Jesus 
foretells  the  betrayal  and  points  out  the  betrayer.  (4)  He 
gives  the  new  commandment,  (5)  He  foretells  the  denial 
of  Peter. 

14.  The  Comforter  chapter,  (1)  The  Comforter  com- 
forts and  promises  another  Comforter,  (2)  He  bequeaths 
peace  and  commands  rejoicing. 

15.  The  True  Vine  chapter. 

16.  The  Last  Words  chapter,  the  close  of  the  farewell 
discourses  with  his  disciples.  Jesus  declares  (i)  That  it  is 
expedient  for  him  to  go  away,  and  (2)  That  he  has  over- 
come the  world. 

17.  The  Lord's  Prayer  chapter. 

18.  The  Arrest  and  Trial  chapter,  (i)  The  arrest  of 
Jesus.  (2)  Jesus  led  before  Annas,  (3)  Peter's  first 
denial.  (4)  Jesus  questioned  by  Annas  and  sent  to  Caia- 
phas.  (5)  Peter's  second  and  third  denial.  (6)  Jesus 
brought  before  Pilate.  (7)  Pilate  questions  Jesus.  (8) 
Pilate  would  release  Jesus. 

19.  The  Crucifixion  chapter,  (i)  Pilate  vacillates  but 
finally  delivers  Jesus  up  to  be  crucified.  (2)  The  crucifixion, 
(3)  The  soldiers  cast  lots  for  his  coat  and  Jesus  commits 
his  mother  to  the  care  of  John  (4)  The  death  of  Jesus. 
(5)  The  piercing  of  his  side.  (6)  His  burial  by  Joseph 
of  Arimathsea  and  Nicodemus. 

20.  The  Resurrection  chapter,  (i)  The  empty  tomb, 
(2)  The  appearance  to  Mary,  (3)  The  appearance  to  the 
disciples  in  the  closed  room.     (4)  The  doubt  of  Thomas. 

(5)  The  appearance  to  Thomas  and  the  other  disciples. 

(6)  The  aim  of  the  Gospel, 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        119 

21.  The  Supplement  chapter,  or  Epilogue.  (i)  The 
appearance  at  the  Sea  of  Tiberias.  (2)  Conversation  with 
Peter  at  this  time.  (3)  The  Attestation.  (4)  Disclaimer 
as  to  completeness. 

VIIL     The  Johannine  Authorship  Disputed 

The  greatest  battle  yet  fought  in  the  field  of  the  higher 
criticism  in  the  New  Testament  is  that  concerning  the 
authorship  of  the  Johannine  books  and  more  especially  of 
the  fourth  Gospel.  It  has  lasted  for  more  than  a  century, 
and  it  is  far  from  being  ended  to-day.  In  the  field  of  the 
New  Testament  it  corresponds  in  interest  and  in  magnitude 
to  the  conflict  which  has  been  waged  in  the  field  of  the  Old 
Testament  over  the  Mosaic  authorship  and  the  composite 
character  of  the  books  of  the  Pentateuch.  In  the  Old 
Testament  discussion  the  higher  critics  have  won  the  day, 
and  there  is  very  general  agreement  now  among  all  au- 
thorities that  the  Law  in  its  present  form  is  a  compara- 
tively late  product  in  Jewish  literature,  and  that  many  dif- 
ferent sources  or  documents  are  to  be  distinguished  in  its 
composition,  and  that  it  is  Mosaic  only  in  remote  origin 
or  inspiration ;  and  in  certain  circles  the  feeling  seems  to 
be  prevalent  that  what  has  happened  in  the  Old  Testament 
also  has  happened  in  the  New  Testament.  Many  seem 
to  think  that  the  decisive  victory  won  by  the  critics  in  the 
greatest  conflict  in  the  Old  Testament  field  has  been  paral- 
leled by  an  equally  decisive  victory  in  the  greatest  conflict 
in  the  New  Testament  field,  and  that  the  belief  in  the 
Johannine  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel  has  been  shat- 
tered as  clearly  and  as  completely  as  the  belief  in  the 
Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch.  This  is  far  from 
being  the  case. 

The  situation  in  all  questions  of  criticism  in  the  New 
Testament  field  is  very  different  from  that  which  obtains 
in  the  Old  Testament.  There  we  are  dealing  with  the 
products  of  remote  antiquity  and  we  have  few  if  any  con- 


I20  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

temporaneous  records,  and  we  must  depend  almost  wholly 
upon  internal  evidence  for  our  conclusions  concerning  the 
authorship  of  the  Old  Testament  books.  The  first  external 
testimonies  which  we  can  adduce  concerning  the  authen- 
ticity of  these  books  are  removed  by  so  many  centuries 
from  the  time  of  their  composition  that  they  can  represent 
only  extremely  attenuated  and  correspondingly  unreliable 
tradition.     It  is  not  so  in  the  case  of  the  New  Testament. 

The  New  Testament  books  were  written  in  a  literary  age. 
The  Christian  literature  is  continuous,  from  the  writings 
of  the  apostles  through  the  writings  of  the  church  Fathers, 
the  apologists,  the  historians,  the  commentators,  and  the 
scholars  to  the  present  time.  We  can  adduce  more  or  less 
conclusive  external  evidence  for  the  authorship  of  New 
Testament  books.  The  church  tradition  concerning  these 
rests  upon  what  the  church  deems  reliable  testimony,  and 
any  attack  upon  the  tradition  must  overthrow  the  testimony 
first  of  all  before  any  internal  evidence  can  be  adduced. 
In  the  case  of  the  fourth  Gospel  we  have  direct  statements 
as  to  its  authorship  among  the  writings  of  the  church 
Fathers  and  direct  and  indirect  quotations  from  it  as  of 
apostolic  authority  in  the  church,  in  writings  reaching  back 
to  the  very  time  of  its  composition.  Upon  what  ground, 
then,  has  any  question  been  raised  concerning  it?  A  brief 
review  of  the  hundred  years  of  discussion  will  answer 
that  query. 

One  cannot  but  suspect  that  some  at  least  of  the  opposi- 
tion to  the  fourth  Gospel  has  sprung  from  theological 
prejudices  and  dogmatic  presuppositions.  A  hardheaded, 
prosaic  critic  naturally  enough  is  disposed  to  run  a  tilt 
against  the  supernaturalism  and  the  mysticism  of  the 
Johannine  literature.  Professor  Davison  closes  his  able 
discussion  of  the  Johannine  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel 
with  this  deliberate  judgment :  "Those  who  hold  such  views 
of  God,  of  Jesus  Christ,  of  history,  and  of  the  Christian 
religion,  as  to  be  able  to  accept  the  view  that  Jesus  of 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        121 

Nazareth  was  indeed  the  Son  of  God,  the  Word  of  God 
Incarnate,  who  wrought  works  that  never  man  wrought 
and  spoke  words  such  as  mere  man  never  spoke,  who  died 
for  our  sins  and  rose  again  from  the  dead  and  Hves  now 
to  impart  the  gift  of  that  Spirit  whom  he  promised — will 
find  httle  difficulty  in  accepting  the  statement  that  John  the 
apostle  who  saw  the  things  recorded  in  the  Gospel  hath 
borne  witness,  and  his  witness  is  true.  Those  to  whom 
such  statements  are  upon  other  grounds  quite  incredible, 
and  who  ascribe  them  not  to  the  religion  of  Jesus  and  his 
first  disciples,  but  to  the  dogma  of  a  period  which  had 
advanced  beyond  the  teaching  of  Paul  to  a  point  which  is 
characteristic  of  the  second  century,  will  naturally  adopt 
any  theory  of  authorship  that  the  case  allows  rather  than 
admit  that  the  fourth  Gospel  was  written  by  the  son  of 
Zebedee.  Absolute  demonstration  is  from  the  nature  of 
the  case  impossible,  but  it  may  fairly  be  said  that  the  ex- 
ternal and  the  internal  evidences  combined  are  such  as 
would  in  any  ordinary  case,  and  apart  from  all  doctrinal 
prepossessions,  be  considered  strong,  if  not  conclusive,  in 
favor  of  the  Johannine  authorship  of  the  Gospel. "^^ 

The  modern  attack  upon  the  authenticity  of  the  fourth 
Gospel  usually  is  said  to  have  begun  with  the  publication 
of  a  book  by  Edward  Evanson,  in  1792,  entitled  The  Dis- 
sonance of  the  Four  Generally  Received  Evangelists,  and 
the  Evidence  of  Their  Respective  Authenticity  Examined. 
Evanson  had  been  a  clergyrhan  in  the  Church  of  England 
and  resigned  his  position  on  the  ground  that  Christianity 
was  too  plain  a  thing  to  be  taught  as  a  lucrative  occupation. 
Free  from  entanglement  with  any  religious  sect  or  party, 
advanced  in  years  and  claiming  to  have  a  mature  judgment 
and  an  unbiased  mind,  he  professed  impartiality  in  his 
investigations.  He  decided  that  the  Gospel  according  to 
Luke   was   authentic,   but   the   other   three   Gospels   were 


w  Hastings,  op.  cit.,  p.  484, 


122  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

"spurious  fictions  of  the  second  century,  unnecessary  and 
even  prejudicial  to  the  cause  of  true  Christianity,  and  in 
every  respect  unworthy  of  the  regard  which  so  many  ages 
have  paid  to  them."^^  He  also  decided  that  the  Epistle 
to  the  Romans  ought  to  be  "expunged  out  of  the  volume" 
of  the  New  Testament,^'^  Almost  no  one  has  paid  any 
regard  to  his  mature  and  impartial  judgment  upon  this 
subject.  The  Epistle  to  the  Romans  has  been  deemed 
authentic  by  practically  all  the  scholars  from  his  time  to 
the  present  day.  Comparatively  little  attention  was  paid 
to  any  other  part  of  his  book;  but  the  thirty-three  pages 
in  it  which  had  to  do  with  the  fourth  Gospel  marked  the 
beginning  of  an  enormous  literature  on  the  subject  which 
has  been  increasing  with  every  succeeding  generation  and 
of  which  there  is  no  apparent  diminution  now. 

The  books  immediately  succeeding  that  of  Evanson 
neither  deserved  nor  received  much  notice.  The  attack 
was  continued  by  a  succession  of  German  theological 
writers.  In  1796  Eckermann  ^^  disputed  the  authenticity 
of  the  fourth  Gospel  in  its  present  form;  and  he  recalled 
his  criticism  in  1807. ^^  In  1801  Vogel^"  summoned  John 
and  his  interpreters  before  the  Last  Judgment,  and  decided 
the  case  against  them.  In  1808  Cludius^^  and  in  181 2 
Ballenstedt^^  renewed  the  skirmish,  but  the  great  battle 
was  still  to  come.  In  1820  Bretschneider  published  a 
modest  little  book  in  Latin,® ^  not  for  general  reading  but 


"  Op.  cit.,  p.  255. 

^  Idem.,  p.  256. 

**  Theologische  Beitrage,  vol.  v. 

*»  Erklarung  aller  dunkeln  Stellen  des  N.  T. 

^"  Der  Evangelist  Johannes  und  seine  Ausleger  vor  dem  jiingsten 
Gericht. 

*^  Uransichten  des  Christenthums  nebst  Untersuchungen  uber  einige 
Bucher  des  N.  T. 

•*  Philo  und  Johannes. 

•^  Probabilia  de  Evangelio  et  Epistolarum  Joannis  Apostoli  indole  et 
origine. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        123 

for  the  judgment  of  the  learned,^*  which  was  a  profound 
and  comprehensive  attack  upon  the  Johannine  authorship 
and  which,  according  to  Weiss/'^  discussed  with  scarcely 
a  single  exception  every  important  suspicion  advanced  by 
more  modern  criticism  against  the  genuineness  of  the 
Gospel.  Weiss  calls  it  an  epoch-making  book,  and  it 
surely  has  been  an  arsenal  of  strength  to  all  later  opponents 
of  the  authenticity  of  the  Gospel  according  to  John. 

Bretschneider  decided  that,  in  all  probability,  the  Gospel 
was  written  by  a  presbyter  in  Alexandria  in  the  middle  of 
the  second  century.  In  the  preface  to  his  book  he  says: 
"But  we  ask  you,  kind  reader,  to  believe  that  whatever 
conclusions  we  have  come  to,  we  do  not  regard  them  as 
the  utterances  of  an  oracle,  but  as  things  which  seem 
probable  after  discussion.  It  is  not  that  in  our  opinion 
the  Gospel  of  John  is  spurious,  but  only  that  it  seems  to  be 
so,  though  we  should  have  preferred  to  write  is  more 
frequently  instead  of,  for  the  thousandth  time,  repeating 
seems.  For  we  expect,  nay,  we  hope,  that  experts  in  critic- 
ism will  teach  us  better  wherever  we  may  have  made  mis- 
takes, and  we  will  accept  their  corrections  most  will- 
ingly."^*' The  event  proved  his  entire  honesty  in  making 
this  promise;  for  when  in  the  most  comprehensive  and 
satisfactory  manner  his  objections  had  been  answered  by 
Liicke^'^  and  Tholuck*'^  and  Olshausen^^  and  Crome'''*^  and 
Hauff,^^  Bretschneider  publicly  withdrew  his  conclusions 
and  declared  that  he  was  satisfied  that  the  authenticity  of 
the  Gospel  was  fully  established  and  the  question  might  be 

6*  Eruditorum  judiciis  modeste  subjecit,  is  part  of  the  title. 
«6  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  vol.  ii,  p.  389. 
**  Probabilia,  preface,  p.  viii. 

•"  Commentar  uber  die  Schriften  des  Evangelisten  Johannes,  3rd  ed. 
1840. 

«8  Commentar  zum  Evangelium  Johannis,  ist  ed.  1827;  7th  ed.  1857. 

«»  Die  Echtheit  der  vier  canonischen  Evangelien,  1823. 

"  Probabilia  baud  Probabilia,  1824. 

"  Die  Authentic  und  der  hohe  Werth  des  Evangeliums  Johannis,  1 83 1 . 


124  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

considered  settled  for  the  theological  world.'^^  It  would 
be  well  if  some  of  the  younger  theologians  of  the  present 
day  would  take  a  lesson  from  Bretschneider's  modesty  and 
open-mindedness,  and  with  learning  no  greater,  if  not  less, 
than  his  would  quit  posing  as  final  oracles  in  this  field,  and 
substitute  for  their  present  positiveness  and  assumption 
something  of  his  willingness  to  learn. 

However,  Bretschneider's  withdrawal  of  his  objections 
did  not  leave  the  field  uncontested  for  any  length  of  time. 
In  1835  Strauss's  Life  of  Jesus  appeared."^^  It  dissolved 
the  Gospel  history  into  myths  and,  of  course,  proceeded 
upon  the  assumption  that  all  of  our  Gospels  were  un- 
authentic. The  specious  calm  which  had  prevailed  for  a 
few  years  was  followed  by  a  fierce  renewal  of  the  conflict. 
Tholuck'^*  and  Neander''^  and  De  Wette'^^  helped  Strauss 
to  a  renewed  study  of  the  fourth  Gospel  and  in  the  third 
edition  of  his  Life  of  Jesus,  published  in  1838,  he  expressed 
considerable  doubt  as  to  the  validity  of  his  former  doubts 
concerning  its  authenticity.  In  the  fourth  edition,  in  1840, 
however,  he  doubted  the  reasonableness  of  his  doubts  con- 
cerning his  former  doubts  and  went  back  to  his  previous 
position  that  the  fourth  Gospel  could  not  have  been  written 
by  the  apostle  John.  One  trouble  with  Strauss  was  that 
he  had  written  what  professed  to  be  a  critical  Life  of 
Jesus  without  any  thoroughgoing  criticism  of  the  sources 
from  which  his  information  concerning  that  life  had  been 
obtained.  That  weakness  was  pointed  out  by  Ferdinand 
Christian  Baur  and  he  proceeded  to  make  good  this  defi- 
ciency in  the  work  of  the  younger  man. 


"  Handbuch  der  Dogmatik,  3rd  ed.  1828,  p.  268,  "die  aufgestellten 
Zweifel  konnen  nun  wohl  als  erledigt  angesehen  werden." 

'^  Das  Leben  Jesu  kritisch  bearbeitet. 

'^  Die  Glaubwurdigkeit  der  evangelischen  Geschichte,  1837;  2nd  ed. 
1838. 

'*  Das  Leben  Jesu  Christi,  1837. 

'^  JCurze  Erklarung  des  Evangeliums  und  der  Briefe  Johannis,  1837. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        125 

Baur  was  capable  of  herculean  labors  and  he  produced 
an  almost  inoredible  amount  of  scholarly  and  critical  ma- 
terial. He  held  the  chair  of  historical  theology  in  the 
University  of  Tiibingen.  For  more  than  thirty  years  he 
was  the  most  influential  leader  in  theological  thought  in 
Germany.  His  noble  presence,  his  great  ability,  and  his 
ardor  for  original  investigation  attracted  many  brilliant 
men  to  his  classroom,  and  he  became  the  founder  of  what 
was  known  as  the  Tubingen  School,  or  the  Tendency 
School  in  criticism.  Zeller,  Kostlin,  Hilgenfeld,  Volkmar, 
Pfleiderer,  Scherer,  Schwegler,  Holsten,  Scholten,  Renan, 
and  Samuel  Davidson  are  among  those  who  rallied  to  the 
standard  raised  by  Baur,  and  it  may  be  doubted  whether 
any  school  of  theology  in  these  modern  days  ever  had 
such  a  galaxy  of  brilliant  supporters  or  ever  seemed  to 
have  everything  its  own  way  to  the  extent  in  which  Baur 
and  his  disciples  appeared  to  sweep  all  before  them  in  the 
middle  and  latter  half  of  the  past  century.  However,  their 
seeming  success  lasted  but  little  longer  than  their  own 
generation. 

Hilgenfeld  probably  was  the  most  able  and  the  most 
influential  of  the  disciples  of  Baur,  and  when  we  visited 
his  lecture  room  in  the  University  at  Jena  in  the  last  decade 
of  the  century,  we  found  only  two  hearers  there ;  and  in 
conversation  afterward  the  old  man  complained  bitterly 
that  the  fashions  had  changed  in  theology  and  the  once 
popular  movement  in  which  he  had  taken  part  was  being 
discarded  by  the  younger  generation.  To-day  both  the 
radical  and  the  conservative  scholars  declare  that  the 
school  as  such  is  obsolete  and  no  one  professes  adherence 
to  its  distinguishing  tenets  any  more.  The  only  sufficient 
reason  for  such  a  phenomenon  as  the  sudden  rise  and 
brilliant  course  and  utter  collapse  of  the  Tubingen  School 
would  seem  to  be  that  truth  is  mighty  and  will  prevail  in 
the  end. 

Baur  overworked  the  tendency  theory  of  the  composition 


126  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

of  the  New  Testament  books  and  dated  most  of  them  a 
hundred  years  or  more  too  late.  He  thought  that  the 
Gospel  according  to  John  was  composed  either  in  Asia 
Minor  or  more  probably  in  Alexandria  in  the  years  be- 
tween A.  D.  1 60  and  170.  Volkmar  put  the  date  back  to 
155.  Zeller  and  Scholten  decided  that  it  would  be  safer 
to  say  that  the  Gospel  was  written  about  150.  Hilgenfeld 
was  compelled  to  retreat  still  farther,  and  he  decided  that 
the  Gospel  was  composed  in  130.  Keim,  after  some  hesi- 
tation, agreed  with  him.  Weizsacker,  Schenkel,  Hase, 
Reuss  pushed  the  date  of  composition  still  farther  back 
between  the  years  no  and  125.  Trench  by  trench  the 
allied  forces  of  tradition  and  truth  had  pushed  tl^e  enemy 
from  the  territory  it  had  usurped  in  its  first  brilliant  dash, 
until  now  the  old  lines  are  established  once  more.  Renan 
concluded,  "There  is  one  thing  at  least  which  I  regard  as 
very  probable,  and  that  is  that  the  fourth  Gospel  was 
written  before  the  year  100,"^'  and  Harnack  says  now  that 
it  was  written  not  before  the  year  80  and  not  after  the 
year  A.  D.  iio."^^ 

This  gradual  lowering  of  the  date  until  it  has  reached 
the  limits  prescribed  by  the  earliest  church  tradition  is 
indicative  of  the  compelling  power  of  the  arguments  and 
facts  marshaled  by  the  upholders  of  the  Johannine  author- 
ship. The  critics  have  been  forced  to  retreat  step  by  step 
until  practically  the  last  stronghold  has  been  surrendered 
and  the  time  is  even  now  at  hand  which  Bishop  Lightfoot 
foretold,  "when  it  will  be  discreditable  to  the  reputation 
of  any  critic  for  sobriety  and  judgment  to  assign  to  this 
Gospel  any  later  date  than  the  end  of  the  first  century  or 
/  the  very  beginning  of  the  second."'^^  What  has  discredited 
\^      the  judgment  of  these  great  men  who  were  disposed  to  put 


"  Life  of  Jesus,  p.  xlv. 
"  Chronologic,  p.  680. 
"  The  Fourth  Gospel,  p.  139. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        127 

the  composition  of  the  fourth  Gospel  at  a  more  or  less 
remote  date  in  the  second  century  and  long  after  the  death 
of  the  apostle  John  ?  A  more  thorough  investigation  of  all 
the  facts  in  hand  and  in  addition  several  most  interesting 
discoveries.    Let  us  notice  two  or  three  of  these. 

IX.    Discoveries  Favorable  to  Authenticity 

I.  Tatian  w^as  a  disciple  of  Justin  Martyr  and  lived  in  the 
latter  half  of  the  second  century.  He  viras  the  author  of 
the  Diatessaron,  the  presentation  of  the  gospel  history  by 
a  combination  of  the  text  furnished  by  our  four  Gospel 
narratives.  Dionysius  Bar  Salibi,  v^ho  lived  at  the  end  of 
the  tw^elfth  century,  said  that  Ephraim  of  Edessa  w^rote 
a  commentary  on  the  Diatessaron  which  began  with  a 
comment  on  the  sentence,  "In  the  beginning  was  the  Word." 
That  meant  that  the  Gospel  according  to  John  was  one 
of  the  four  Gospels  used  by  Tatian  in  the  composition  of 
his  harmony,  and,  if  so,  that  it  was  of  equal  authority  with 
the  other  three  in  the  church  of  that  age  and,  therefore,  it 
must  have  had  some  standing  in  antiquity  and  could  not 
have  been  composed  in  that  period  in  which  the  Diatessaron 
itself  was  constructed,  as  Baur  had  concluded. 

It  was  easy  enough  to  say  that  the  statement  of  Diony- 
sius was  too  late  to  be  of  any  authority  and  so  rule  it  out 
of  court ;  and  as  long  as  no  manuscript  of  the  Diatessaron 
was  forthcoming  that  contention  might  be  allowed  to  stand. 
However,  Ephraim's  commentary  upon  the  Diatessaron 
was  in  existence  in  an  Armenian  translation  in  a  monastery 
in  Venice,  and  the  Mechitarist  Fathers  there  published  it 
in  1836,  There  are  not  many  Armenian  scholars  in  Europe, 
and  this  publication  attracted  no  notice  until  Ezra  Abbot 
and  Harnack  brought  it  to  the  attention  of  the  learned 
world  in  1880.  It  contained  the  substance  of  Tatian's 
Diatessaron  and  confirmed  the  statement  of  Dionysius  as 
to  its  use  of  the  fourth  Gospel  with  the  other  three. 


128  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Great  excitement  was  aroused  by  this  discovery,  and  the 
discussions  which  followed  led  to  the  further  discovery  of 
an  Arabic  manuscript  of  the  Diatessaron  itself  in  the  Vati- 
can library.  This  in  turn  led  to  the  discovery  of  a  very 
beautiful  Arabic  manuscript  in  Egypt,  and,  being  brought 
to  Rome,  it  was  published  at  the  time  of  Pope  Leo  XIII's 
jubilee  in  1888.  It  was  apparent  at  once  that  the  Diates- 
saron proved  that  the  Gospel  according  to  John  was  not  first 
coming  into  existence  in  A.  D.  170,  as  Baur  had  suggested, 
but  that  it  was  already  in  existence  in  A.  D.  160,  and  of 
equal  standing  with  the  other  three,  and  that  these  four 
Gospels  had  established  themselves  in  the  church  with  an 
authority  shared  with  no  other  books  of  this  kind.  That 
meant  that  they  had  been  handed  down  from  the  preceding 
generations  and  it  seemed  more  than  likely  that  the  Me- 
moirs of  the  Apostles,  which  Justin  Martyr  said  were  read 
in  the  public  services  of  the  Christians,  were  the  Gospels 
thus  highly  honored  by  his  pupil  Tatian. 

2.  Baur  and  Zeller  and  Schwegler  and  Hilgenfeld  and 
Renan  all  denied  that  any  quotations  from  the  fourth 
Gospel  could  be  found  in  the  Clementine  Homilies.  Only 
nineteen  of  them  were  known,  and  the  parallels  of  language 
in  these  were  open  to  question  and  were  strenuously  denied 
by  the  Tubingen  School.  Then  a  twentieth  Homily  was 
discovered  and  published,  and  it  contained  a  quotation 
from  the  fourth  Gospel  so  plain  that  it  had  to  be  acknowl- 
edged by  all. 

3.  The  Philosophumena  of  Hippolytus  was  discovered  at 
Mount  Athos  in  1842,  and  when  its  contents  had  been  fully 
discussed  it  was  agreed  by  almost  all  critics  that  it  con- 
tained first-hand  quotations  from  Basilides,  the  Gnostic 
heretic  of  the  first  quarter  of  the  second  century.  When 
that  had  been  decided,  it  was  apparent  that  in  these  quota- 
tions from  Basilides  there  were  quotations  from  the  fourth 
Gospel,  and  even  Keim  acknowledged  that  the  fourth 
Gospel  existed  in  the  time  of  Basilides  and  that  the  Gnostics 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        129 

were  making  use  of  the  book.^'^     That  meant  that  it  was 
of  recognized  authority  at  this  early  date. 

All  the  discoveries  of  the  past  century  in  this  field  have 
proved  to  be  favorable  to  the  Johannine  authorship  of  the 
book.  No  discovery  has  given  any  aid  to  the  opponents 
of  that  fact.  Now  that  the  composition  of  the  fourth 
Gospel  is  acknowledged  by  all  parties  to  fall  into  the  period 
covered  by  the  last  years  of  the  apostle  John,  spent,  accord- 
ing to  church  tradition,  in  Ephesus,  the  battle  against  the 
Johannine  authorship  must  shift  its  ground.  If  the  Gospel 
existed  from  this  early  time,  as  all  now  admit,  it  could  have 
been  written  by  the  apostle  himself,  if  he  were  living  and 
in  Ephesus  at  this  date.  In  the  latest  attacks  upon  the 
authenticity  of  the  book  the  attempt  is  made  to  prove  that 
John  never  lived  in  Ephesus,  and  that  he  did  not  live  to 
a  great  old  age,  but  was  martyred  at  the  same  time  with 
his  brother  James  and  comparatively  early  in  the  history 
of  the  church. 

X.  Was  John  an  Early  Martyr? 
Schwartz  fixed  the  date  of  his  martyrdom  at  A.  D.  44,^^ 
and  Wellhausen  calls  his  discussion  of  the  subject  a  demon- 
stration.^2  This  theory  of  the  early  martyrdom  of  John 
is  quite  a  favorite  among  radical  critics  to-day,  and  it  is 
defended  by  Pfleiderer,^^  Bousset,^*  Johannes  Weiss,^^ 
Menzies,86    Jiilicher,^^     Schmiedel,^^    Loisy,^^     Moffatt,^^ 

*>  Jesu  von  Nazara,  vol.  i,  p.  144. 
81  Tod  der  Sohne  Zebedaei,  1904. 
^  Commentary  on  Mark  10.  39. 
^  Urchristenthum,  vol.  ii,  p.  411. 
**  Theologische  Rundschau,  1905,  pp.  225f. 
^  Commentary,  on  Mark  10.  39. 
^  Commentary,  on  Mark  10.  39. 
^  Introduction,  pp.  377f. 

88  Encyclopedia  Biblica,  pp.  2509,  2510,  and  The  Johannine  Writ- 
ings, p.  177. 

83  Revue  de  I'histoire  des  religions,  1904,  pp.  568f. 
3°  Introduction,  pp.  6oif. 


I30  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Burkitt,^^  and  Bacon.^2  What  proofs  have  these  men  for 
such  a  conclusion?  Only  three,  and  these  are  all  very 
questionable. 

1.  The  first  is  the  fact  that  Jesus  said  to  James  and  John, 
"The  cup  that  I  drink  ye  shall  drink,"*^^  and  these  critics 
feel  sure  that  such  a  prophecy  w^ould  not  have  been  allowed 
to  remain  in  the  gospel  record  if  it  had  not  been  literally 
fulfilled,  or  else  that  the  prophecy  was  formulated  and 
foisted  into  the  gospel  record  after  the  double  martyrdom. 
They  do  not  hold  that  James  and  John  were  literally  cruci- 
fied, as  Jesus  was;  but  they  think  that  the  prophecy  de- 
mands literal  martyrdom  for  both  of  them,  whether  it  ante- 
dates or  postdates  the  event.  Origen  did  not  think  so.  He 
considered  the  sufferings  which  John  endured  for  the 
cause  a  sufficient  martyrdom  to  prove  his  participation  in 
the  cup  which  the  Master  drank.^'*  Jerome  declared  that 
John  in  spirit  failed  not  of  martyrdom  and  thus  drank  the 
cup  of  confession.95  What  right  has  anyone  to  say  that 
only  literally  fulfilled  prophecies  are  recorded  in  our 
Gospels?  Such  a  conclusion  is  wholly  subjective,  and  in 
the  face  of  clear  statements  to  the  contrary  in  a  multitude 
of  the  church  Fathers  the  assumption  of  John's  early 
martyrdom  upon  such  a  basis  as  this  is  utterly  unwar- 
ranted. 

2.  The  church  tradition  represented  by  the  testimony  of 
numbers  of  the  church  Fathers  is  that  John  lived  to  ex- 
treme old  age.  Is  this  tradition  unanimous?  Is  there  no 
voice  raised  in  denial  of  that  fact?  These  critics  think 
they  have  one  testimony  which,  being  early,  will  outweigh 
all  the  later  testimonies  to  the  contrary.  They  think  they 
have  the  testimony  of  Papias ;  but  when  we  ask  them  where 


'^  The  Gospel  History  and  its  Transmission,  pp.  252f. 
*2  The  Fourth  Gospel,  Part  I,  chap.  v. 
•^  Mark  lo.  39;  Matt.  20.  23. 
•*  Commentary,  on  Matt.  20.  23. 
^  Commentary,  on  Matt.  20.  23. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        131 

this  testimony  is  to  be  found,  we  are  told  that  it  is  found 
in  a  passage  in  the  writings  of  Georgius  Hamartolus,  of 
the  ninth  century,  and  when  we  read  the  passage  itself 
we  find  that  George  the  Sinful  is  bearing  his  testimony  to 
the  truth  of  the  general  tradition  that  John  lived  in  his 
old  age  in  the  reigns  of  Domitian  and  Nerva  in  the  city 
of  Ephesus. 

We  quote  the  passage  in  full :  "After  Domitian,  Nerva 
reigned  one  year ;  and  he,  having  recalled  John  from  the 
island,  dismissed  him  to  live  in  Ephesus.  Then,  being  the 
only  survivor  of  the  twelve  disciples,  and  having  composed 
the  Gospel  according  to  him,  he  has  been  deemed  worthy 
of  martyrdom.  For  Papias,  the  Bishop  of  Hierapolis,  hav- 
ing become  an  eyewitness  of  this  one,  in  the  second  book 
of  the  Oracles  of  the  Lord,  declares  that  he  was  slain  by 
the  Jews,  having  evidently  fulfilled  with  his  brother  the 
prediction  of  Christ  concerning  him,  and  his  own  confes- 
sion and  assent  in  regard  to  this.  For  when  the  Lord  said 
to  them,  Can  ye  drink  the  cup  which  I  drink?,  and  when 
they  readily  assented  and  agreed.  Ye  shall,  he  says,  drink 
my  cup,  and  be  baptized  with  the  baptism  with  which  I  am 
baptized ;  and  this  is  as  we  should  expect ;  for  it  is  im- 
possible for  God  to  lie.  And  so  also  the  very  learned 
Origen,  in  the  commentary  on  Matthew,  affirms  that  John 
hath  suffered  martyrdom,  intimating  that  he  has  learned 
this  from  the  successors  of  the  apostles.  And,  indeed, 
also  the  highly  learned  Eusebius  says  in  the  Ecclesiastical 
History,  Thomas  has  had  Parthia  assigned  to  him;  John, 
Asia,  with  whom  having  lived  he  ended  his  days  in 
Ephesus."^^ 

This,  then,  is  the  testimony  of  George  the  Sinful,  that 
John  the  apostle  lived  in  Ephesus  as  late  as  the  days  of 
the  Emperor  Nerva,  A.  D.  96-98.  He  evidently  has  no 
thought  of  saying  that  John  died  in  A.  D.  44,  at  the  same 


"•  For  the  Greek,  see  Lightfoot,  The  Apostolic  Fathers,  p.  519. 


132  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

time  with  his  brother  James.  He  says  that  John  was  the 
last  survivor  of  the  apostoHc  twelve,  and  he  declares  that 
John  was  the  author  of  the  Gospel  accorded  to  him.  In 
all  of  these  things  he  is  in  line  with  the  church  traditions 
concerning  these  matters,  and  in  no  one  of  these  things 
are  the  modern  critics  willing  to  follow  his  authority.  They 
think  he  is  absolutely  untrustworthy  at  every  one  of  these 
points.  Yet  with  unhesitating  enthusiasm  they  pin  their 
faith  to  his  quotation  from  Papias,  and  they  interpret  this 
quotation  to  mean  that  John  and  James  were  martyred 
together. 

Papias,  as  reported  by  Georgius  in  this  passage,  does 
not  say  that.  He  simply  says  in  this  quotation  that  John 
was  slain  by  the  Jews  and  when  he  was  slain  he  fulfilled 
with  James  the  prediction  of  Christ.  It  is  evident  that 
George  the  Sinful  did  not  think  when  he  made  this  quota- 
tion that  Papias  was  contradicting  what  he  himself  had 
just  said,  that  John  was  the  only  survivor  of  the  twelve. 
That  would  have  been  impossible  if  James  and  John  had 
suffered  martyrdom  together.  The  interpretation  of  the 
critics,  then,  is  not  the  interpretation  of  George  the  Sinful. 
Would  it  not  be  fair  to  infer  that  he  never  would  have 
made  this  quotation  if  their  interpretation  of  it  had  been 
the  correct  one  ?  Then,  who  can  tell  whether  he  has  quoted 
Papias  correctly?  If  he  is  untrustworthy  in  all  these  other 
statements,  why  not  here? 

Our  doubt  at  this  point  is  strengthened  when  we  remem- 
ber that  he  quotes  another  authority  for  the  fact  of  John's 
martyrdom.  His  second  authority  is  no  less  than  the 
learned  Origen.  Why  do  not  the  critics  quote  Origen, 
then,  as  well  as  Papias  as  a  witness  to  the  martyrdom  of 
John  with  James?  Because  we  have  the  passage  which 
George  the  Sinful  quotes  from  Origen,  and  when  we  con- 
sult the  original  we  find  that  George  has  misunderstood 
and  misinterpreted  Origen,  who  says  that  John's  exile  to 
Patmos  and  his  sufferings  there  were  a  sufficient  martyr- 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        133 

dom  in  themselves  to  fulfill  the  Lord's  prophecy  concerning 
the  cup  he  should  drink,  and  who  has  no  slightest  intima- 
tion that  John  was  killed  by  the  Jews  either  at  the  same 
time  with  James  or  at  any  later  date.  If  George  the  Sinful 
misrepresents  Origen,  may  he  not  equally  misrepresent 
Papias  ? 

The  church  Fathers,  Irenaeus,  Eusebius,  and  the  rest, 
had  the  writings  of  Papias  in  their  hands,  and  yet  they  all 
agree  that  John  lived  to  old  age  in  Ephesus,  and  no  one 
of  them  ever  hints  that  Papias  or  anyone  else  ever  had 
said  anything  to  the  contrary.  Is  it  conceivable  that  all 
of  them  would  have  been  silent  concerning  any  contradic- 
tory statement  of  Papias,  and  utterly  ignoring  it,  would 
have  united  in  the  propagation  of  what  they  knew  to  be 
an  untruthful  tale?  Is  it  not  altogether  more  probable 
that  they  knew  that  Papias  agreed  with  all  other  ancient 
authorities  in  this  matter? 

If  a  ninth-century  author  of  the  character  of  Georgius 
Hamartolus  is  to  be  given  any  credence  at  this  point,  why 
may  we  not  quote  other  ninth-century  authority  on  the 
other  side  of  the  question?  The  upholders  of  the  "Papias- 
tradition,"  so  called,  for  the  most  part  preserve  a  discreet 
silence  concerning  the  argument  to  the  fourth  Gospel  con- 
tained in  a  Vatican  manuscript  of  the  ninth  century  which 
reads,  "The  Gospel  of  John  was  revealed  and  given  to  the 
churches  by  John  while  he  still  remained  in  the  body,  as 
one  named  Papias,  of  Hierapolis,  a  beloved  disciple  of 
John,  related  in  his  five  books  of  Expositions."®'^  Here 
is  another  ninth-century  authority  to  be  set  over  against 
Georgius  Hamartolus.  Is  it  not  likely  to  represent  the 
truer  tradition  in  the  case?  We  are  assured  here  that 
Papias  himself  witnesses  to  the  authorship  of  the  fourth 
Gospel  by  John.  Papias  was  a  contemporary  of  Polycarp, 
and,  like  Polycarp,  he  may  have  been  twenty-five  years  old 


"  Thomasius,  Works,  vol.  i,  p.  344,  and  Pitra,  Analecta,  ii,  i6o. 


134  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

when  the  fourth  Gospel  was  composed.  They  may  both 
have  known  all  about  it,  and  if  they  did,  of  course  their 
testimony  would  agree,  for  they  were  both  good  men  and 
true. 

We  are  not  so  sure  of  George  the  Sinful.  Moffatt  be- 
lieves that  George  the  Sinful  is  not  to  be  trusted  in  his 
report  of  what  Origen  said,^^  but  he  holds  with  all 
tenacity  to  his  trustworthiness  in  the  report  of  what  Papias 
said,  though  that  report  as  interpreted  by  himself  stands 
in  flat  contradiction  to  the  unanimous  church  tradition  on 
this  subject.  He  says  that  it  is  confirmed  by  a  late  epito- 
mizer  of  Philip  of  Side.  The  Chronicle  of  Philip  was 
written  in  the  fifth  century  and  the  epitome  of  it  was  pro- 
duced in  the  seventh  or  eighth  century,  and  it  says,  "Papias 
in  his  second  book  says  that  John  the  divine  and  James  his 
brother  were  killed  by  the  Jews." 

Now,  in  the  first  place  it  is  almost  certain  that  this  quota- 
tion cannot  be  an  exact  quotation,  for  all  are  agreed  that 
the  apostle  John  was  not  called  "John  the  divine"  earlier 
than  the  close  of  the  fourth  century,  and  therefore  it  would 
seem  to  have  been  impossible  for  Papias  in  the  second 
century  to  make  use  of  this  much  later  title;  and  in  the 
second  place,  Philip  of  Side,  like  George  the  Sinful,  is 
acknowledged  on  all  hands  to  be  inaccurate  and  unreliable 
and  utterly  valueless  as  an  authority  over  against  such 
trustworthy  testimony  as  that  given  by  Irenseus,  Clement  of 
Alexandria,  Tertullian,  Eusebius,  Augustine,  Jerome,  and 
the  other  church  Fathers.  Shall  we  cast  all  of  these  aside 
in  order  to  give  heed  to  much  later  writers  who  stand  con- 
victed of  carelessness  and  inaccuracy,  men  surely  not  of 
equal  standing  in  the  church  and  confessedly  capable  of 
erroneous  statements  proving  their  utter  lack  of  critical 
insight  and  personal  unreliability? 

The  "Papias-tradition,"  upon  which  Moffatt  and  Burkitt 


•*  Introduction,  p.  604. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        135 

and  Bacon  lay  such  stress,  turns  out  to  be  of  the  most 
precarious  if  not  preposterous  foundation,  if  it  can  be 
called  a  foundation  at  all ;  and  it  is  not  strange  that  sober 
scholarship,  represented  by  such  men  as  Lightfoot^^  and 
Harnack^^^  and  Zahn,i^i  rejects  its  validity  without  any 
hesitation.1^2  If  j^he  argument  from  prophecy  is  puerile 
and  futile,  and  the  argument  from  Papias  savors  more  of 
wild  invention  than  it  does  of  firm  foundation,  is  there 
any  other  reason  which  can  be  suggested  for  thinking  that 
John  and  James  were  martyred  together? 

3.  With  all  seeming  gravity  these  critics  refer  us  to  the 
church  calendars  in  which  James  and  John  are  commemo- 
rated together  as  martyrs.  Moffatt  concedes  that  their  evi- 
dence is  not  as  good  as  that  from  the  prophecy  and  the 
"Papias-tradition" — and  we  feel  like  asking,  Could  any 
evidence  be  worse  than  this  ? — but  he  thinks  that  they  serve 
to  corroborate  substantially  the  tradition  which  they  em- 
body.^^^  Sir  William  Ramsay  says  with  all  reason,  "That 
James  and  John,  who  were  not  slain  at  the  same  time, 
should  be  commemorated  together,  is  the  flimsiest  conceiv- 
able evidence  that  John  was  killed  early  in  Jerusalem.  The 
bracketing  together  of  the  memory  of  apostles  who  had 
some  historical  connection  in  life,  but  none  in  death,  must 
be  regarded  as  the  worst  side,  historically  speaking,  of  the 
martyrologies."^^^  These  martyrologies  were  made  up  by 
combinations  of  local  calendars  and  date  from  the  fourth 
and  fifth  centuries  and  were  intended  for  convenience  in 
church  anniversary  celebrations  and  not  for  final  authorities 
as  to  historical  fact ;  and  a  cause  must  be  desperate  indeed 


»9  Essays  on  Supernatural  Religion,  p.  211. 
100  Die  Chronologic,  II,  i,  662f. 
^"1  Introduction,  vol.  iii,  pp.  205,  206. 

i""  Also  Abbott,  Davison,  Drummond,  Sir  William  Ramsay,  J.  Ar- 
mitage  Robinson,  Stanton,  and  Workman. 
^"^  Introduction,  p.  606. 
">*  The  First  Christian  Century,  p.  49,  n. 


136  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

which  will  need  to  bolster  itself  up  on  any  such  untrust- 
worthy props. 

The  supposedly  literally  fulfilled  prophecy  of  Jesus,  the 
indefinite  and  garbled  and  almost  certainly  incorrect  report 
by  Georgius  Hamartolus  and  Philip  Sidetes  of  what  Papias 
said,  and  the  questionable  corroboration  of  the  late  church 
calendars — these  are  the  three  converging  lines  of  evidence 
upon  which  the  most  modern  of  our  critics  seem  chiefly  to 
depend  for  reasons  for  their  faith  that  John  the  apostle 
died  in  early  life  and  therefore  never  lived  in  Ephesus  and 
never  wrote  the  fourth  Gospel.  Is  it  not  fair  to  presume 
that  with  no  better  proofs  than  these  in  hand  this  criticism 
will  be  as  obsolete  in  another  generation  as  the  Tubingen 
criticism  is  in  our  own? 

If  the  church  Fathers  are  right  in  saying  that  John  the 
apostle  lived  to  old  age  in  Ephesus,  and  if  the  best  authori- 
^/  ties  are  agreed  that  the  fourth  Gospel  must  have  come  into 
existence  some  time  near  the  close  of  the  first  century 
there  in  Ephesus,  how  shall  we  escape  the  conclusion  that 
the  Gospel  was  written  by  the  apostle  John  himself?  There 
is  still  one  refuge  left  for  those  who  are  determined  to 
deny  the  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel  to  the  apostle. 
If  the  net  result  of  a  century  of  criticism  has  been  to  prove 
that  the  church  tradition  was  correct  and  that  the  fourth 
Gospel  was  written  in  Ephesus  by  John,  it  is  still  possible 
to  say  that  it  was  not  written  by  the  apostle  John  but  by 
the  presbyter  John,  John  the  elder,  or  some  other  John 
of  the  same  age.  Some  of  the  critics  seem  ready  to  believe 
anything  rather  than  allow  that  the  belief  in  the  apostle's 
authorship  may  be  trustworthy. 

XI.     Claims  of  John  the  Presbyter 

Who  was  John  the  elder  or  the  presbyter?  What  rea- 
sons have  we  to  think  that  such  a  man,  as  distinct  from 
John  the  apostle,  ever  existed?    There  were  three  converg- 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        137 

ing  lines  of  evidence  ( ?)  for  the  apostle  John's  early 
martyrdom,  and  now  we  are  told  again  that  there  are  three 
converging  lines  of  evidence  for  the  existence  of  the  pres- 
byter John.  I.  The  Second  Epistle  of  John  and  the  Third 
Epistle  of  John  are  written  by  this  man.  Do  they  not 
begin  with  the  salutations,  "The  elder  unto  the  elect  lady 
and  her  children,"^*^^  and  "The  elder  unto  Gaius  the  be- 
loved" P^*^^  There  must  have  been  two  religious  leaders 
in  Ephesus  at  this  time  and  both  were  named  John.  One 
was  John  the  apostle  and  the  other  was  John  the  elder. 
This  does  not  seem  quite  self-evident  to  us.  Was  not  John 
the  apostle  very  aged  at  this  time  and  may  he  not  have 
been  called  "the  elder"  for  that  reason?  Or  may  he  not 
have  called  himself  an  elder  even  as  Peter  did  in  his  epistle 
when  he  wrote,  "The  elders  therefore  among  you  I  exhort, 
who  am  a  fellow  elder."^^'^  John  the  apostle  never  calls 
himself  by  that  title.  Indeed,  he  uses  the  word  "apostle" 
only  once  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  He  has  it  three  times  in  the 
Apocalypse.  It  does  not  seem  to  have  been  a  favorite  term 
with  him  any  more  than  with  Matthew  and  Mark,  both  of 
whom  use  the  word  only  once.  Luke  has  the  title  six  times 
in  his  Gospel  and  some  twenty-eight  times  in  the  book  of 
Acts.  John  prefers  the  humble  title  "disciple"  or  the  title 
which  he  can  share  with  the  other  officials  in  the  church, 
"elder."  It  is  characteristic  of  his  modesty  to  call  himself 
by  this  name.  We  must  have  some  better  proof  than  this, 
therefore,  before  we  come  to  any  sure  conclusion  in  this 
matter.  When  we  ask  for  further  proof  it  is  forthcoming, 
and  it  turns  out  again  to  be  a  quotation  from  Papias. 

2.  Papias  seems  to  have  been  a  great  comfort  to  many 
of  the  critics.  The  extant  fragments  of  his  writings  are 
so  few  in  number  and  the  context  in  the  case  of  each  is  so 
uncertain  and  the  statements  he  makes  are  sometimes  so 


I"*  2  John  I. 
i°«  3  John  I. 
!•"  I  Pet.  5.  I. 


138  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

ambiguous  that  great  freedom  in  his  interpretation  becomes 
possible,  and  consequently  we  find  the  authorities  quoting 
Papias  in  support  of  quite  opposite  views.  In  this  case 
the  authorities  behind  the  quotation  from  Papias  are  much 
better  than  Georgius  Hamartolus  and  Philip  Sidetes,  and 
we  are  ready  to  recognize  the  words  quoted  as  surely  be- 
longing to  Papias;  but,  what  do  they  mean?  Let  us  look 
at  them  and  see  for  ourselves.  Papias  said,  "If,  then,  any- 
one came,  who  had  been  a  follower  of  the  elders,  I  ques- 
tioned him  in  regard  to  the  words  of  the  elders — what 
Andrew  or  what  Peter  said,  or  what  was  said  by  Philip,  or 
by  Thomas,  or  by  James,  or  by  John,  or  by  Matthew,  or  by 
any  other  of  the  disciples  of  the  Lord,  and  what  things 
Aristion  and  the  presbyter  John,  the  disciples  of  the  Lord, 
say."^^^  Eusebius  quotes  this  passage  and  then  adds :  "The 
name  'John'  is  twice  enumerated  by  him.  The  first  one 
he  mentions  in  connection  with  Peter  and  James  and  Mat- 
thew and  the  rest  of  the  apostles,  clearly  meaning  the  evan- 
gelist; but  the  other  John  he  mentions  after  an  interval, 
and  places  him  among  others  outside  of  the  number  of 
the  apostles,  putting  Aristion  before  him,  and  he  distinctly 
calls  him  a  presbyter.  This  shows  that  the  statement  of 
those  is  true  who  say  that  there  were  two  persons  in  Asia 
that  bore  the  same  name." 

This  looks  like  a  reasonable  conclusion. i*^^  Why  should 
Papias  mention  the  apostle  John  twice  in  the  same  passage  ? 
However,  we  notice  the  following  facts  in  connection  with 
this  passage:  (i)  If  the  elder  John  is  to  be  distinguished 
from  the  apostle  John  in  this  passage,  then  Papias  is  the 
single  authority  for  the  existence  of  such  a  man.  Papias 
appeals  to  him  as  of  exceptional  dignity,  yet  no  other  of 
the  earliest  church  Fathers  ever  mentions  him  or  seems  to 
know  anything  at  all  about  him.    It  appears  improbable  that 

"»  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.  iii,  39. 

!"•  So  Jerome,  Erasmus,  Grotius,  Credner,  Fritzsche,  Bretschneider, 
Wieseler,  Ebrard. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        139 

a  distinguished  teacher  could  have  lived  in  Ephesus  at  this 
time  and  have  left  no  other  memorial  behind  him.  (2) 
Irenaeus  read  this  statement  made  by  Papias  and  under- 
stood him  to  refer  to  the  apostle  John  in  both  occurrences 
of  the  name.  As  far  as  we  know,  this  was  the  understand- 
ing of  all  the  church  Fathers  up  to  the  time  of  Eusebius. 
Irenseus  believed  that  Papias  was  a  hearer  of  the  apostle 
John  and  of  Polycarp  his  disciple;  and  he  never  seemed 
to  suspect  that  Papias  was  citing  any  other  authority  than 
that  of  the  evangelist. 

(3)  With  these  considerations  in  mind  we  turn  to  the 
passage  in  Papias  again,  and  we  conclude  that  Papias  is 
not  distinguishing  between  two  persons  at  all,  but  simply 
between  two  methods  of  gathering  his  material,  one  by 
report  of  what  John  the  apostle  had  said,  and  one  by  hear- 
ing the  apostle  himself.  He  tells  us  what  Aristion  and  John 
say,  and  what  others  report  that  Peter  and  John  and  the  rest 
of  the  apostles  said  before  he,  Papias,  became  a  disciple. 
(4)  We  notice  that  Papias  explicitly  calls  Peter  and  An- 
drew and  Philip  and  Thomas  and  James  and  John  and 
Matthew  "elders."  They  all  belonged  to  the  preceding 
generation,  and  Papias  calls  them  all  "elders."  Therefore 
Papias  himself  becomes  our  authority  for  saying  that  John 
the  apostle  was  John  the  elder  as  well.  The  other  apostles 
had  died,  but  John  had  lived  on  into  his  own  day.  Papias 
had  a  chance  to  hear  John  for  himself. 

Then,  is  not  this  all  he  intends  to  say  in  this  ambiguous 
statement?  "I  had  two  sources  of  information,  first,  what 
John  the  elder  was  reported  to  me  to  have  said,  and,  second, 
what  I  myself  have  heard  John  the  elder  say.  I  call  John 
the  apostle  'John  the  elder,'  as  I  call  Peter  and  Matthew 
and  the  other  apostles  'elders' ;  for  they  were  all  disciples 
of  the  Lord,  even  as  Aristion  and  John  were  who  have 
survived  to  our  day."  This  quotation  from  Papias,  then, 
is  far  from  establishing  the  existence  of  another  John.  It, 
rather,  confirms  us  in  our  opinion  that  John  the  apostle 


I40  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

and  John  the  elder  are  one  and  the  same  man.  Have  we 
any  better  proof  than  this  that  another  John  lived  in 
Ephesus  during  the  residence  of  the  apostle  there?  There 
is  no  better  proof,  but  we  have  one  more  authority  to  quote 
in  favor  of  this  supposition. 

3.  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  is  the  only  other  authority 
previous  to  Eusebius  who  seems  to  have  suspected  that 
there  might  be  more  than  one  John  among  the  Christian 
leaders  of  Ephesus.  He  says,  "I  am  of  the  opinion  that 
there  were  many  of  the  same  name  as  the  apostle  John, 
who,  on  account  of  their  love  for  him,  and  because  they 
admired  and  emulated  him,  and  desired  to  be  loved  by  the 
Lord  as  he  was,  took  to  themselves  the  same  surname,  as 
many  of  the  children  of  the  faithful  are  called  Paul  or 
Peter" ;  and  later  he  adds,  "They  say  that  there  are  two 
monuments  in  Ephesus,  each  bearing  the  name  of  John."^^" 
Concerning  these  statements  we  make  the  following  obser- 
vations, (i)  Dionysius  seems  to  be  noting  mere  hearsay 
and  conjecture.  (2)  Jerome  says  that  some  think  that 
the  two  memorials  at  Ephesus  are  both  in  honor  of  John 
the  evangelist.^ ^1  Zahn  tries  to  prove  that  these  two  me- 
morials were  churches,  one  on  the  site  of  the  house  where 
John  had  lived  inside  the  walls  of  the  city  and  one  on  the 
site  of  John's  tomb  outside  the  walls  of  the  city,  and  he  has 
succeeded  in  making  this  seem  very  probable. ^^^ 

Here,  then,  is  the  sum  total  of  the  testimony  to  the 
existence  of  an  elder  John  who  was  not  the  apostle.  Diony- 
sius lived  a  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  John  had  been 
buried,  and  he  hears  that  there  are  two  memorials  in 
Ephesus  to  John,  and  concludes,  therefore,  that  there  may 
have  been  two  Johns.  Eusebius  lived  nearly  a  century 
later  still,  and  he  finds  a  passage  in  Papias  which  mentions 
the  name  of  John  twice  in  one  long  and  involved  sentence, 

""Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.,  vii,  25. 

"1  De  vir.  iU.,  9. 

^  Acta  Johaxmis,  p.  cliv,  sq. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        141 

and  he  concludes,  therefore,  that  Papias  must  have  meant 
two  Johns.  All  later  writers  only  repeat  what  these  two 
Fathers  have  said. 

We  see  at  once  what  a  nebulous  character  is  this  sup- 
posed additional  John  the  elder.  His  very  existence  is  open 
to  question.  Lightfoot,  Westcott,  and  Huther  are  disposed 
to  believe  that  there  was  such  an  individual,  although  they 
do  not  think  that  he  wrote  the  fourth  Gospel,  but  Farrar, 
Warfield,  Salmon,  and  Plummer  seriously  doubt  his  exist- 
ence. Keim  relegates  this  "Doppelganger"  of  the  apostle 
to  the  land  of  ghosts.  There  was  another  mysterious  John 
the  presbyter  or  Prester  John  in  the  twelfth  century.  It 
is  interesting  and  almost  pathetic  to  see  what  an  implicit 
faith  many  of  the  critics  profess  in  the  presbyter  John 
and  in  his  residence  in  Ephesus  and  in  his  authorship  of 
the  whole  of  the  Johannine  literature,  while  they  maintain 
a  most  profound  skepticism  as  to  the  possibility  of  any 
connection  of  the  apostle  John  with  these  things.  Forsak- 
ing the  substance  of  the  church  tradition  concerning  these 
matters,  they  go  chasing  after  a  shadow.  They  seem  to 
be  capable  of  exercising  more  faith  in  a  phantom  than  in 
a  fact. 

If  this  ghost  of  the  presbyter  John  could  be  laid  by 
learned  argument,  it  would  seem  that  the  volume  on  John 
the  Presbyter  and  the  Fourth  Gospel,  published  by  John 
Chapman  in  191 1,  might  be  sufficient  to  do  it;  but  in  all 
probability  he  will  continue  to  flit  through  the  imaginations 
of  modern  critics  and  over  dubious  theological  battlefields 
for  many  a  day  to  come.  Delff,  Dobschiitz,  Harnack, 
Schiirer,  Moffatt,  McGiffert,  and  Bacon  defend  John  the 
presbyter's  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel ;  but  we  feel 
like  saying  of  all  of  -these  what  Sanday  said  in  another 
connection  of  the  last  of  them:  "Bacon  has  been  to  Ger- 
many, and  learned  his  lesson  there  too  well.  At  least  I 
find  myself  differing  profoundly  from  his  whole  method 
of  argument.     The  broad,  simple  arguments  that  seem  to 


142  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

me  really  of  importance  he  puts  aside,  and  then  he  spends 
his  strength  in  making  bricks  with  a  minimum  of  straw, 
and  even  with  no  straw  at  all  (the  argument  of  silence). "^^^ 

XII.     Evidence  Favorable  to  Authenticity 

The  question  concerning  the  authorship  of  the  Johannine 
literature  is  far  from  being  a  closed  question  as  yet  in  the 
theological  world,  but  the  century  of  conflict  has  left  us 
with  some  clear  gains.  In  the  first  place,  the  date  of  the 
fourth  Gospel  can  no  longer  be  pushed  far  down  into  the 
second  century  or  be  far  removed  from  the  time  of  the 
residence  of  the  apostle  John  in  Ephesus.  That  would  seem 
to  be  definitely  settled  now.  In  the  second  place,  the  cen^ 
tury  of  unparalleled  research  in  this  field  surely  has  war- 
ranted the  conclusions  which  Harnack  has  expressed  in  the 
preface  to  his  great  work.  The  Chronology  of  Ancient 
Christian  Literature  down  to  the  Time  of  Eusebius,  when 
he  says :  "There  was  a  time  in  which  people  felt  obliged 
to  regard  the  oldest  Christian  literature  as  a  tissue  of 
deceptions  and  falsifications.  That  time  is  past.  For 
science  it  was  an  episode  in  which  she  learned  much,  and 
after  which  she  has  much  to  forget.  .  .  .  The  oldest  litera- 
ture of  the  church  is,  in  the  main  points,  and  in  most  of 
its  details,  from  the  point  of  view  of  literary  history,  vera- 
cious and  trustworthy." 

This  certainly  is  a  great  gain.  We  would  not  push  such 
an  admission  too  far,  but  it  surely  is  a  comfort  to  Chris- 
tians to  know  that  the  most  thoroughgoing  use  of  the  his- 
torical method  of  investigation,  pure  science  as  such,  is  at 
last  constrained  to  admit  that  the  early  Christian  writers 
were  not  persistently  and  perpetually  deceivers  and  liars, 
but  on  the  whole  their  statements  have  approved  them- 
selves as  veracious  and  trustworthy.  We  take  off  our  hats 
to  science  and  acknowledge  the  acknowledgment,  while  we 

*"  The  Criticism  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  p.  24. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        143 

reflect  within  ourselves  that  we  were  assured  of  it  all  the 
time. 

Too  many  writers  in  this  field  have  approached  the  works 
of  the  church  Fathers  as  if  they  were  the  productions  of 
men  of  very  suspicious  character,  banded  together  to  mis- 
lead and  deceive;  and  such  writers  seem  to  have  proceeded 
upon  the  assumption  that  they  were  called  to  point  out  all 
apparent  contradictions  and  possible  misconceptions  and  in 
every  way  which  human  cleverness  or  diabolical  ingenuity 
could  devise  they  have  attempted  to  cast  discredit  upon 
the  statements  made  by  the  leaders  and  the  saints  in  the 
church.  It  often  was  done  in  the  name  of  science,  but  it 
has  turned  out  to  be  pseudo-science  at  last.  After  a  century 
of  conflict  the  better,  truer  science  has  pronounced  its  ver- 
dict in  favor  of  the  general  trustworthiness  of  the  authori- 
ties in  this  field.  With  this  spirit  of  confidence  in  both 
their  ability  and  their  sincerity  we  ask  now  what  the  church 
Fathers  have  told  us  about  the  authorship  of  the  fourth 
Gospel. 

We  naturally  begin  with  Irenseus,  since  Irenaeus,  Poly- 
carp,  and  John  himself  furnish  us  with  a  threefold  link 
of  evidence  which  cannot  be  broken.  Irenaeus  tells  us  how 
the  four  Gospels  were  written,  and  after  mentioning  the 
other  three  he  adds,  "Then  John,  the  disciple  of  the  Lord, 
who  also  had  leaned  upon  his  breast,  did  himself  publish  a 
Gospel  during  his  residence  at  Ephesus  in  Asla."'^^*  Could 
any  testimony  be  more  explicit  than  that?  There  can  be 
no  doubt  that  Irenaeus  intends  to  say  that  John  the  apostle 
lived  in  Ephesus  and  wrote  the  fourth  Gospel  there.  Any- 
one who  denies  these  facts  must  disparage  or  disprove  this 
testimony  of  Irenaeus  in  order  to  do  so.  Is  it  "veracious 
and  trustworthy"? 

Irenaeus  was  an  Asiatic  by  birth,  but  he  was  bishop  at 
Lyons  in  Gaul  in  A.  D.  178.     To  that  extent,  therefore. 


"■»  Adv.  Haer.,  Ill,  i,  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  i,  p.  414. 


144  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

his  testimony  represents  the  church  in  the  east  and  in  the 
west.  He  was  the  successor  of  Pothinus,  a  man  nearly 
ninety  years  of  age,  a  man  who  was  a  growing  youth  when 
the  apostle  John  died.  His  memory  would  go  back  to  the 
apostle's  own  time.  Would  Irenseus  hold  any  opinion  as 
to  the  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel  which  Pothinus 
would  not  share?  There  is  no  slightest  reason  to  think 
that  there  was  any  difference  of  thought  at  this  point 
between  them.  However,  there  is  a  still  closer  link  between 
Irenaeus  and  the  apostolic  age.  Irenaeus  was  the  pupil  of 
Polycarp,  who  declared  that  he  had  been  "eighty-six  years 
in  the  Lord"  at  the  time  of  his  martyrdom,  A.  D.  155. 
Polycarp  was  a  disciple  of  the  apostle  John,  and  he  was  a 
young  man  grown  when  the  apostle  John  died.  Irenaeus 
was  a  young  man  grown  when  he  was  a  disciple  of  Poly- 
carp. 

Writing  to  Florinus  of  those  early  days,  he  says :  "I 
remember  the  events  of  that  time  more  clearly  than  those 
of  recent  years.  For  what  boys  learn,  growing  with  their 
mind,  becomes  joined  with  it ;  so  that  I  am  able  to  describe 
the  very  place  in  which  the  blessed  Polycarp  sat  as  he  dis- 
coursed, and  his  goings  out  and  his  comings  in,  and  the 
manner  of  his  life,  and  his  physical  appearance,  and  his 
discourses  to  the  people,  and  the  accounts  which  he  gave 
of  his  intercourse  with  John  and  with  the  others  who  had 
seen  the  Lord.  .  .  .  These  things  being  told  me  by  the 
mercy  of  God,  I  listened  to  them  attentively,  noting  them 
down,  not  on  paper,  but  in  my  heart.  And  continually, 
through  God's  grace,  I  recall  them  faithfully."^  ^^  Here 
is  an  old  man's  appeal  to  the  clearness  and  the  validity  of 
his  recollections  of  his  youth,  and  that  youth  links  him 
with  one  who  was  a  youth  of  like  age  when  he  was  a 
disciple  of  the  aged  apostle  John  at  Ephesus. 

The  certainty  of   Irenaeus   rests  upon  the  certainty  of 

"6  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.,  V.  20.  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers, 
vol.  i,  pp.  238,  239. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        145 

Pothinus  and  of  Polycarp,  who  were  living  at  the  time 
when  the  apostle  John  wrote  the  fourth  Gospel.  This  testi- 
mony does  not  appear  first  as  though  resolving  itself  out 
of  the  blank  mist  at  the  close  of  the  second  century.  It 
is  no  original  creation  of  Irenaeus  and  his  age.  It  goes 
straight  back  through  Polycarp  to  the  apostle  John  himself. 
It  represents  the  general  opinion  of  the  church  in  the  east 
and  in  the  west.  It  is  the  ancient,  primitive,  unbroken, 
and  unquestioned  tradition.  It  is  this  Irenaeus  tradition 
found  in  his  extant  works  and  of  undoubted  authenticity 
which  Schmiedel  and  Moffatt  and  Bacon  and  the  rest  would 
set  aside  in  favor  of  the  "Papias-tradition,"  not  extant  in 
any  of  his  writings  to-day,  and  reported  imperfectly  by 
such  unreliable  authorities  as  Georgius  Hamartolus  and 
Philip  Sidetes  in  the  seventh  or  eighth  or  ninth  century! 
That  "Papias-tradition,"  so-called,  is  uncorroborated  by 
any  one  of  the  church  Fathers.  The  Irenaeus  tradition  is 
confirmed  on  every  hand. 

Clement  of  Alexandria  probably  was  born  in  Athens  and 
was  converted  there.  Having  become  a  Christian,  he  trav- 
eled from  teacher  to  teacher,  and  in  this  way  he  came  under 
the  instruction  of  an  Italian,  an  Ionian,  an  Egyptian,  a 
Syrian,  an  Assyrian,  and  a  Hebrew,  and  in  the  various  lands 
he  became  acquainted  with  the  common  tradition  concern- 
ing the  origin  of  the  Gospels  and  the  other  New  Testament 
books.  He  says  of  his  teachers,  "These  men,  preserving 
the  true  tradition  directly  from  James,  Peter,  John,  Paul, 
son  receiving  it  from  the  father,  came  by  God's  providence 
even  to  us  to  deposit  among  us  the  seeds  of  truth  which 
were  derived  from  their  ancestors  and  the  apostles." ^^^ 

From  these  sources,  representing  the  east  and  the  west 
and  covering  almost  the  entire  compass  of  the  Christian 
Church  of  that  early  age,  Clement  received  his  education 
in  the  Christian  verities ;  and  then  at  Alexandria  he  became 


"« Strom,  I,  i.    Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  ii,  p.  301. 


146  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

associated  with  Pantsenus,  who  was  a  contemporary  of 
those  who  had  known  the  apostles.  He  knew  as  well  as 
any  man  could  what  the  early  church  believed  concerning 
these  things.  Having  written  down  "the  tradition  of  the 
earliest  presbyters"  concerning  the  other  three  Gospels  he 
adds,  "Last  of  all  John,  observing  that  the  external  facts 
had  been  made  plain  in  the  existing  Gospels,  being  urged 
by  his  friends  and  inspired  by  the  Spirit,  composed  a 
spiritual  Gospel."^  ^'^  From  his  Ionian  teacher  Clement 
learned  the  facts  concerning  the  fourth  Gospel  as  they  were 
known  at  Ephesus  where  the  Gospel  was  composed,  and  in 
traveling  through  the  church  he  found  no  contrary  tradi- 
tion anywhere.  All  Christians  had  believed  from  the  begin- 
ning that  the  apostle  John  had  written  the  "spiritual  Gospel." 

Tertullian  was  the  leader  of  the  church  in  north  Africa. 
Cardinal  Newman  called  him  "the  most  powerful  writer 
of  the  early  centuries." ^^^  In  his  extant  works  he  quotes 
from  every  chapter  and  in  some  chapters  from  almost  every 
verse  of  the  fourth  Gospel.  It  is  of  apostolic  and  unques- 
tioned authority  with  him.  He  says:  "We  assert,  to  begin 
with,  that  the  evangelical  instrument  has  for  its  authors 
apostles.  ...  Of  the  apostles  then,  John  and  Matthew 
first  plant  faith  in  us."^^^  A  little  farther  on  in  the  same 
treatise  he  says:  "The  same  authority  of  the  apostolic 
churches  will  support  the  other  Gospels  which  we  have 
equally  through  them  and  according  to  their  use.  I  mean 
the  Gospels  of  John  and  Matthew." ^20  xhe  apostolic 
churches  had  had  no  other  faith.  They  all  believed  in  the 
apostle  John's  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel. 

These  men,  Irenseus,  Tertullian,  and  Clement  of  Alexan- 
dria, give  us  the  testimony  of  the  church  in  Asia  Minor, 


"'  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.,  VI,  14,  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers, 
vol.  i,  p.  201. 

^^*  Tracts  Theological  and  Ecclesiastical,  p.  220. 

*^  Advers.  Marc,  IV,  ii.    Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  iii,  p.  347. 

^^  Advers.  Marc,  IV,  v.    Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  iii,  p.  350. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL         147 

Alexandria,  Carthage,  Rome,  and  Gaul.  In  their  travels 
they  had  covered  the  entire  territory  occupied  by  Christen- 
dom in  their  day.  For  a  quarter  of  a  century  Irenaeus  was 
a  contemporary  of  Polycarp,  who  for  a  quarter  of  a  century 
was  a  contemporary  of  the  apostle  John.  Clement  studied 
with  elders  who  were  contemporaries  with  the  apostles. 
Tertullian  was  sure  that  he  represented  the  tradition  of  the 
apostolic  churches.  All  of  them  knew  that  their  faith  was 
that  which  the  church  had  held  from  the  very  beginning. 
No  other  name  ever  was  attached  to  the  Gospel  except 
that  of  the  apostle  John.  It  would  have  been  impossible 
to  impute  it  to  him  wrongly  either  while  he  lived  or  in 
these  generations  immediately  after  his  death.  Too  many 
people  knew  the  facts  in  the  case.  These  facts  were 
handed  down  from  father  to  son  until  they  reached  the 
men  we  have  quoted. 

These  men  were  leaders  in  the  church.  They  were  men 
of  preeminent  standing  and  ability.  They  were  not  critical 
in  our  modern  sense  of  the  word,  but  they  were  not  credu- 
lous. They  were  careful  in  their  inquiries,  and  they  did 
not  acknowledge  apostolic  authority  without  good  reason. 
It  seems  almost  impossible  that  the  general  tradition  of  the 
church  represented  by  these  authoritative  names  should  go 
wrong  as  to  such  important  facts  as  the  long  residence  of 
John  in  Ephesus  and  his  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel. 
The  external  evidence  is  favorable  to  these  facts  and,  in- 
deed, gives  explicit  testimony  to  them.  Any  attack  made 
upon  this  testimony  has  proven  to  be  either  baseless  or 
resting  upon  the  most  fragile  foundations. 

Therefore  we  are  disposed  to  agree  with  Ritschl,  who 
said  that  he  believed  the  fourth  Gospel  to  be  authentic  be- 
cause the  denial  of  its  authenticity  raised  far  greater  diffi- 
culties than  its  acceptance.^^i  and  with  Ewald,  who  de- 
clared in  his  day  that  "every  argument,  from  every  quarter 


/ 


^^  Die  Entstehung  der  altkatholischen  Kirche,  p.  48. 


148  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

to  which  we  can  look,  every  trace  and  record,  combine 
together  to  render  any  serious  doubt  upon  the  question 
absolutely  impossible."i22  xhat  represents  our  own  con- 
clusion, although  it  does  not  represent  the  conclusion  of 
the  persistent  assailants  of  the  authenticity  of  the  fourth 
Gospel  through  the  last  one  hundred  years.  However,  we 
believe  that  the  century  and  more  of  investigation  has 
brought  such  a  wealth  of  both  external  and  internal  evi- 
dence to  light  that  Ebrard's  emphatic  statement  is  well- 
nigh  justified  when  he  says  that  "with  the  exception  of 
some  of  Paul's  epistles,  no  book  can  be  found  throughout 
the  whole  of  the  ancient  literature,  both  Christian  and 
profane,  which  can  show  such  numerous  and  reliable  proofs 
of  its  genuineness  as  the  Gospel  of  John/'^^s 

The  first  known  commentary  on  any  New  Testament 
book  was  a  commentary  on  the  fourth  Gospel  written  by 
Heracleon,  A.  D,  145.  Quotations  from  the  Gospel  are 
found  in  the  writings  of  Melito,  Apollinaris,  and  Theophilus 
in  the  same  generation  with  Irenaeus,  TertuUian,  and 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  in  the  Clementines  and  the 
writings  of  Tatian,  Valentinus,  and  Justin  Martyr  of  the 
generation  preceding,  and  in  the  writings  of  Basilides, 
Polycarp,  and  Ignatius  in  the  generation  preceding  that 
and  immediately  following  the  generation  to  which  the 
apostle  John  belonged.  The  fourth  Gospel  did  not  steal 
into  the  church  by  the  back  door  at  the  end  of  the  second 
century.  It  came  straight  down  from  the  end  of  the  first 
century  with  apostolic  authority  behind  it  from  the  first. 
Eusebius  is  right  in  classing  the  fourth  Gospel  among  the 
acknowledged  books,  of  which  there  never  was  any  ques- 
tion in  the  church.  124  in  one  of  the  most  recent  discus- 
sions of  the  subject  James  Iverach  summarizes  his  conclu- 
sions by  saying,  "In  truth  the  external  evidence  for  the 

122  Westcott,  Introduction  to  the  Gospels,  p.  x, 

'2^  Scientific  Criticism  of  the  Gospel  History,  p.  598. 

^  Hist.  Eccles.,  HI,  24,  2,  17. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        149 

early  date  and  Johannine  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel 
is  as  great  both  in  extent  and  variety  as  it  is  for  any  book 
of  the  New  Testament,  and  far  greater  than  any  that  we 
possess  for  any  work  of  classical  antiquity."^25 

The  internal  evidence  confirms  the  external  evidence  in 
a  multitude  of  particulars.  It  would  be  easy  to  show,  as 
it  has  been  shown  so  many  times,  that  the  writer  betrays 
an  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  language,  history,  geog- 
raphy, customs,  and  beliefs  of  Palestine  in  the  time  of 
Jesus.  He  must  have  been  a  Jew,  and  a  Palestinian  Jew. 
Then,  the  narrative  is  so  vivid  and  circumstantial  that  it 
makes  the  impression  again  and  again  that  it  must  proceed 
from  an  eyewitness.  It  is  written  from  the  standpoint  of 
the  apostolic  circle.  There  are  numerous  indications  that 
the  author  is  the  apostle  John,  though  his  name  never  is 
mentioned. 

If  it  be  suggested  that  all  of  these  things  might  have 
been  put  into  the  book  by  a  clever  forger,  it  surely  is  suffi- 
cient to  say  with  Luthardt,  "The  fiction  would  be  carried 
out  far  too  artistically,  and  far  too  cunningly,  to  fit  either 
the  simplicity  or  the  moral  character  of  the  book,"i26  or 
to  conclude  with  Drummond:  "I  think  that  we  may  safely 
say  that  we  know  that  the  book  was  not  written  by  any 
of  the  eminent  men  of  the  second  century,  whose  names 
have  been  preserved ;  certainly  none  whose  works  have 
survived  were  capable  of  writing  it.  Is  it,  then,  likely  that 
there  lived  and  died  among  them,  entirely  unknown,  a  man 
who  throughout  the  century  had  absolutely  no  competitor 
in  the  wealth,  originality,  and  depth  of  his  genius,  and  this 
at  a  time  when  the  struggling  church  required  all  her  ablest 
men  to  come  to  the  front?  And  if  an  author  possessing 
this  spiritual  stature  had  issued  his  anonymous  book,  "is 
it  credible  that  he  would  have  allowed  it  to  be  received  and 
circulated  as  the  work  of  the  apostle,  and  thus  have  prac- 

^6  International  Standard  Bible  Encyclopaedia,  p.  1722. 
>*•  St.  John,  the  Author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  p.  186, 


I50  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

ticed  an  enormous  deception  on  the  church?  I  know  that 
critics  think  that  no  stupidity  is  too  fooHsh,  no  forgery 
too  criminal,  for  an  early  Christian ;  but  for  my  part  I  can- 
not believe  in  these  moral  monstrosities."i27 

Sanday  sums  up  the  whole  case  when  he  says:  "The 
Gospel  of  Saint  John  presents  an  unique  phenomenon.  It 
contains  two  distinct  strata  of  thought,  both  quite  unmis- 
takable to  the  critical  eye;  and  in  each  of  these  strata, 
again,  there  are  local  peculiarities  which  complicate  the 
problem.  When  it  comes  to  be  closely  investigated,  the 
complexities  of  the  problem  are  such  that  the  whole  of 
literature  probably  does  not  furnish  a  parallel.  The  hypoth- 
esis of  authorship  that  shall  satisfy  them  thus  becomes  in 
its  turn  equally  complicated.  It  is  necessary  to  find  one 
who  shall  be  at  once  Jew  and  Christian,  intensely  Jewish, 
and  yet  comprehensively  Christian;  brought  up  on  the  Old 
Testament,  and  yet  with  a  strong  tincture  of  Alexandrian 
philosophy;  using  a  language  in  which  the  Hebrew  struc- 
ture and  the  Greek  superstructure  are  equally  conspicuous ; 
one  who  had  mixed  personally  in  the  events,  and  yet  at  the 
time  of  writing  stood  at  a  distance  from  them;  an  im- 
mediate disciple  of  Jesus,  and  yet  possessed  of  so  powerful 
an  individuality  as  to  impress  the  mark  of  himself  upon 
his  recollections;  a  nature  capable  of  the  most  ardent  and 
clinging  affection,  and  yet  an  unsparing  denouncer  of 
hostile  agencies  of  any  kind  which  lay  outside  his  own 
charmed  circle.  There  is  one  historical  figure  which  seems 
to  fit  like  a  key  into  all  these  intricate  wards — the  figure  of 
Saint  John,  as  it  has  been  handed  down  to  us  by  a  well- 
authenticated  tradition.  I  can  conceive  no  second.  If  the 
Saint  John  of  history  did  not  exist,  he  would  have  to  be 
invented  to  account  for  his  Gospel. "^^^ 

At  the  close  of  the  fourth  Gospel  we  find  this  attestation : 
"This  is  the  disciple  that  beareth  witness  of  these  things, 

127  The  Character  and  Authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  pp.  192,  193. 

128  The  Study  of  the  New  Testament,  p.  32. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        151 

and  wrote  these  things ;  and  we  know  that  his  witness  is 
true."^29  This  may  be  the  attestation  of  the  church  of 
Ephesus  or  of  the  officials  of  that  church,  and  since  it  is 
to  be  found  in  all  the  manuscripts  and  versions  of  the 
Gospel,  we  know  that  it  is  of  great  antiquity.  Now  that 
we  have  seen  how  the  internal  evidence  so  completely  agrees 
with  the  supposition  of  the  apostle  John's  authorship,  and 
we  have  found  that  the  authoritative  tradition  in  the  church 
is  so  continuous  and  so  unanimous  upon  this  point,  and  we 
remember  how  weak  the  attacks  upon  John's  residence  in 
Ephesus  and  the  attempted  proofs  that  the  presbyter  John 
was  a  different  individual  from  the  apostle  have  proved  to 
be,  and  we  recall  how  every  new  discovery  and  the  most 
exhaustive  investigation  of  all  the  records  have  only  served 
to  substantiate  the  belief  of  the  church  from  the  beginning, 
we  are  ready  in  our  turn,  after  the  greatest  and  the  longest 
conflict  in  the  whole  field  of  New  Testament  criticism,  to 
set  our  seal  to  the  truth  of  that  ancient  attestation,  and  to 
say  for  ourselves  with  all  profundity  of  conviction:  "This 
matter  is  now  beyond  any  serious  doubt.  We  are  assured 
that  the  beloved  disciple,  the  apostle  John,  bore  his  witness 
to  the  things  recorded  in  the  fourth  Gospel,  and  wrote  the 
book;  and  we  are  assured  that  his  witness  is  true." 

XIII.    Opposition  and  Defense;  Conclusion 

The  criticism  of  Strauss  was  carried  to  its  logical  ab- 
surdity by  Bruno  Bauer.^-^'^  Then  the  greater  master  Ferdi- 
nand Christian  Baur^^^  founded  the  Tubingen  School  and 
he  and  his  disciples  made  most  determined  assaults  upon 
the  authenticity  of  the  fourth  Gospel.    Zeller,^^^  Kostlin,!^^ 

129  John  21.  24. 

1^  Kritik  der  evangelischen  Geschichte  des  Johannis,  1840. 

"1  Kritische  Untersuchungen  uber  die  kanonischen  Evangelien,  1847. 
Die  Tubinger  Schtde,  i860. 

"2  Die  ausseren  Zeugnisse  uber  das  Dasein  und  der  Ursprung  des 
vierten  Evangeliums,  1845. 

"2  Der  Lehrbegriflf  des  Evangeliums  und  der  Brief e  Johannis,  1843. 


152  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Schwegler,i34  Scholten,i35  Schenkel/sc  Scherer/^^  Hil- 
genfeld/3^  Volkmar,!^^  Weizsacker,^*"  Thoma/-*i  Tay- 
ler/^2  Schweitzer/^2  Renan/^^  and  Samuel  Davidson/^^ 
continued  the  attack  begun  by  Baur;  but  even  Bacon  now 
declares  that  "Baur's  theory  of  the  origin  of  the  Johannine 
writings  is  as  obsolete  as  the  Ptolemaic  geography. "i"*® 
Driven  from  one  position  to  another,  the  line  of  attack  has 
changed  as  the  need  of  the  day  required,  but  the  conflict 
never  has  ended  and  new  theories  now  are  being  ad- 
vanced which  in  turn  we  believe  are  doomed  in  the  light 
of  the  advancing  truth  to  become  as  obsolete  as  their  pred- 
ecessors. 

Among  the  more  modern  opponents  of  the  Johannine 
authorship  we  may  mention  H.  J.  Holtzmann,^^'^  Otto 
tloltzmann,i48  Dellf,i49  Schmiedel,i5o  Wrede.i^i  Wernle,i52 


13*  Das  nachapostolische  Zeitalter  in  den  Hauptmomenten  seiner 
Entwickelung,  1846. 

13^  Het  Evangelic  naar  Johannes,  1865. 

"8  Das  Charakterbild  Jesu,  1864. 

^^  Les  Precedes  de  la  Critique  Interne,  1855. 

138  Das  Evangelium  und  die  Briefe  Johannis  nach  ihrem  Lehrbegriff, 
1849.  Die  Evangelien,  nach  ihrer  Entstehung  und  geschichtlichen 
Bedeutung,  1854. 

"9  Die  Religion  Jesu,  1857. 

'^^  Untersuchungen  iiber  die  evangelische  Geschichte,  1864. 

"1  Die  Genesis  des  Johannes-Evangeliums,  1882. 

1*2  An  Attempt  to  Ascertain  the  Character  of  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
1867. 

"3  Das  Evangelium  Johannes,  1841. 

1**  Vie  de  Jesus,  1867. 

'*  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  1868. 

1"  The  Fourth  Gospel  in  Research  and  Debate,  p.  20. 

"^  Einleitung  in  das  Neue  Testament,  1885. 

1**  Das  Johannes-Evangelium,  1887. 

"9  Das  vierte  Evangelium  wiederhergestellt,  1890. 

15"  The  Johannine  Writings,  1908. 

'51  Charakter  und  Tendenz  des  Johannes-Evangeliums,  1903. 

1**  The  Beginnings  of  Christianity,  1903. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        153 

Harnack,i53  Julicher,^^^  Reville.i^s  Loisy,^^^  Dob- 
schutz/57  Bruckner/58  Kreyenbuhl.i^a  Pfleiderer/^o  E.  A. 
Abbott/61  Moffatt,i«2  McGiffert/e^  Bacon,i«4  Cone/s^ 
Gardner/^<5  Grill, ^^^  and  E.  F.  Scott. ^^^  Everything  writ- 
ten in  opposition  has  been  fully  answered  by  the  defenders 
of  the  authenticity  of  the  fourth  Gospel  and  an  illustrious 
line  of  authorities  stretches  over  the  whole  period  of  the 
century  and  more  since  Evanson  made  his  first  assault  and 
to  them  belongs  the  credit  of  maintaining  intact  the  citadel 
of  tradition  which  in  this  case  as  in  so  many  others  has 
proved  to  be  the  citadel  of  the  impregnable  truth.  In  the 
Old  Testament  the  greatest  battle  in  the  field  of  the  higher 
criticism  has  been  decided  against  the  Mosaic  authorship 
of  the  Pentateuch.  In  the  New  Testament  the  greatest 
battle  in  the  field  of  literary  criticism  has  not  been  decided 
against  the  Johannine  authorship  of  the  fourth  Gospel. 
There  are  as  able  defenders  of  the  authenticity  of  the 
fourth  Gospel  to-day  as  at  any  time  in  the  past  century 
and  the  many  victories  which  have  been  won  in  the  century 
and  the  evident  weaknesses  in  the  present-day  assaults  give 
promise  that  the  defense  soon  will  be  in  complete  possession 
of  the  field. 


'^  Chronologic  der  altchristlichen  Litteratur,  1904. 

'"  Einleitung  in  das  Neue  Testament,  1894. 

^^  Le  quatrieme  evangile,  son  origine  et  sa  valeur,  1901. 

^^  Autour  d'un  petit  livre,  1903. 

*"  Probleme  des  apostolischen  Zeitalters,  1904. 

'^  Die  vier  Evangelien,  1887. 

^^  Das  Evangelium  der  Wahrheit,  1905. 

'^  Urchristentum,  1902. 

'"  Encyclopedia  Biblica,  I76if. 

'*2  Introduction,  191 1. 

"'  The  Apostolic  Age,  1906. 

'M  The  Fourth  Gospel,  1910. 

i«5  The  Gospel  and  its  Earliest  Interpreters,  1893. 

'86  The  Ephesian  Gospel,  1915. 

'"  Untersuchungen  uber  die  Entstehung  des  vierten  Evangeliums.igoz, 

"8  The  Fourth  Gospel,  1906. 


154  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Among  those  who  have  rendered  valiant  service  to  the 
cause  in  the  whole  period  of  the  discussion  we  may  give 
honorable  mention  to  Schleiermacher/^^  De  Wette/'^'* 
Neander,i7i    Lucke,i72    Bertholdt,!'^    Bleek,!^^    Ebrard/^s 

Ewald/'^^  Lange/'^'^  Tholuck/^^  Mayer/'''^  Hengsten- 
berg,iso  Hase,i8i  Ritschl/82  Beyschlag,!^^  Luthardt,!^* 
Weiss/85  Zahn/86  Qodet/s^  Pressense.iss  Ezra  Abbot,i89 
Lightfoot/90  Liddon/91  Leathes,!^^  Evans/93  Macdon- 
ald,i94    Norton,i95    Gloag/^^    Fisher/^^    Orr,i98    Drum- 


1*'  Einleitung  ins  Neue  Testament,  1845. 

"•^  Lehrbuch  der  historisch-kritischen  Einleitung,  1826. 

"^  Das  Leben  Jesu  Christi,  1837. 

"2  Commentar  uber  die  Schriften  des  Evangelisten  Johannes,  1840. 

173  Verisimilia  de  origine  Evangelii  Johannis,  1805. 

"*  Einleitung  in  das  Neue  Testament,  i860. 

"6  Das  Evangelium  Johannis,  1845. 

"*  Die  Johanneischen  Schriften,  1862. 

^^'  Das  Evangelium  nach  Johannes,  i860. 

"^  Commentar  zum  Evangelium  Johannis,  1857. 

"^  Die  Echtheit  des  Evangeliums  nach  Johannes,  1854. 

1^"  Das  Evangelium  des  heiligen  Johannes,  1863. 

^*i  Vom  Evangelium  des  Johannis,  1866. 

^^  Die  Entstehung  der  altkatholischen  Kirche,  1857. 

'*'  Zur  Johanneischen  Frage,  1875. 

'«*  St.  John,  the  Author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  1875. 

"*  Manual  of  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  1886, 

186  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  1909. 

•8^  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  John,  1886. 

188  J^sus  Christ,  1866. 

189  The  Authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  1880. 
I'o  Biblical  Essays,  1893. 

"1  The  Divinity  of  Our  Lord,  1884. 

192  The  Witness  of  St.  John  to  Christ,  1 870. 

"3  St.  John,  the  Author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  1888. 

19*  Life  and  Writings  of  St.  John,  1880. 

"5  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospel,  1848. 

19*  Introduction  to  the  Johannine  Writings,  1891. 

"^  Grounds  of  Theistic  and  Christian  Belief,  1902. 

188  The  Authenticity  of  John's  Gospel,  1870. 


THE  MOST  REMARKABLE  GOSPEL        155 

mond/»9  Watkins,2oo  Westcott,2oi  Scott-Moncrief,202  San- 
day,2'>3  Strachan,204  Strong,205  Stanton,206  Dods,207  and 
Davison.2^8  f  }^g  scholarship  has  not  been  on  one  side  only 
in  this  struggle.  The  scholarship  of  these  defenders  of 
the  authenticity  of  the  fourth  Gospel  has  been  equal  or 
superior  to  that  of  their  foes.  It  was  of  a  saner  quality  and 
rested  upon  firmer  and  surer  foundations,  as  the  past  cen- 
tury has  shown.  It  is  not  likely  that  any  discovery  in  the 
future  will  radically  change  the  situation  of  to-day,  as  far 
as  this  question  is  concerned.  The  triumph  of  the  truth 
through  a  hundred  years  will  be  maintained  in  the  days  to 
come.  In  reading  the  fourth  Gospel  we  shall  rest  assured 
that  we  are  coming  into  touch  with  that  disciple  whom 
Jesus  loved  most  and  who  had  the  clearest  insight  into  the 
Master's  mission  and  message  and  mind. 

For  a  long,  long  time  John  had  been  a  disciple  of  Jesus. 
It  probably  was  more  than  sixty  years  since  he  had  left  his 
fisher's  nets  to  follow  the  Lord.  It  was  a  long,  long  way 
he  had  come  from  Galilee  to  Ephesus  in  Asia  Minor.  He 
had  labored  to  do  his  Master's  will  and  to  maintain  his 
Master's  spirit  in  the  church  which  honored  the  Master's 
name.  He  had  preached  the  gospel  truth  to  two  genera- 
tions. Now  he  would  write  it  down  for  all  the  generations  ^ 
to  come.  The  fourth  Gospel  was  to  be  the  Gospel  for  all 
eternity. 


18^  The  Character  and  Authorship  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  1903. 
""0  Modem  Criticism  considered  in  its  relation  to  the  Fourth  Gospel, 
1800. 

-01  Commentary  on  St.  John's  Gospel,  1899. 

="-  St.  John,  Apostle,  Evangelist,  and  Prophet,  1909. 

"^^  The  Criticism  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,  1905. 

""''  Dictionary  of  Christ  and  the  Gospels,  1906. 

2°5  Hastings's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  1899. 

'^'^  Gospels  as  Historical  Documents,  1903. 

2°'  Expositor's  Greek  Testament,  vol.  i,  1897. 

^"8  Hastings's  single  volume  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  1909. 


PART  III 
THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN 


PART  III 
THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN 

I.    What  Shall  We  Call  It? 

What  is  the  First  Epistle  of  John?  Is  it  an  epistle?  Is 
it  a  letter?  Is  it  something  else?  Deissmann  in  his  Bible 
Studies  has  written  a  long  discussion  of  the  distinction 
between  a  letter  and  an  epistle  ;i  and  when  he  comes  to 
apply  his  principles  to  the  New  Testament  literature  he  has 
no  trouble  in  deciding  that  the  letters  of  Paul  are  true 
letters,  and  that  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  the  First 
Epistle  of  Peter,  and  the  Epistle  of  James  are  epistles ;  but 
he  is  uncertain  about  the  classification  of  First  John,  and 
he  gives  up  altogether  when  he  comes  to  Second  and  Third 
John.  He  cannot  decide  whether  these  are  letters  or 
epistles.  Of  First  John  he  says,  "It  is  a  brochure,  the 
literary  eidos  of  which  cannot  be  determined  just  at  once."^ 
He  thinks  that,  strictly  speaking,  it  cannot  be  called  an 
epistle,  and  he  seems  disposed  to  class  it  among  the  letters 
of  the  New  Testament,  but  he  never  states  any  clear  con- 
clusion concerning  it. 

The  ancient  letters  always  began  with  a  stereotyped 
form,  just  as  our  modern  letters  do.  We  begin  with  the 
date  and  the  name  of  the  person  addressed,  and  we  sign 
our  name  at  the  close.  The  ancient  letter  reversed  this 
practice  and  began  with  the  writer's  name,  followed  by  the 
name  of  the  person  or  persons  addressed  and  then  by  a 
formal  greeting.  There  is  nothing  of  this  sort  in  First 
John.     John's   name   does   not   appear   anywhere  in   the 

*  Pp-  3-59- 
» P.  50. 

159 


\y 


i6o  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

writing  from  beginning  to  end.  No  proper  names  appear 
in  it,  either  of  the  writer  or  of  the  persons  addressed. 
There  is  no  formal  greeting  and  no  formal  close.  It  begins 
as  abruptly  as  the  fourth  Gospel  did  and  in  language  which 
at  once  recalls  the  Logos  theology  of  that  Prologue.  Like 
a  clap  of  thunder  out  of  a  clear  sky  the  introduction  to 
this  little  writing  hurls  the  truth  at  us  with  the  vehement 
affirmation  of  a  Boanerges  of  the  faith.  If  it  is  not  an 
epistle  and  if  it  has  not  the  usual  form  of  a  letter,  what 
is  it?  Heidegger  called  it  "a  manual  of  doctrine."^  Reuss^ 
and  Westcott^  call  it  "a  homiletical  essay,  a  Pastoral." 
Michaelis^  and  others  call  it  a  treatise.  It  evidently  is 
difficult  to  name  it. 

John  does  what  others  do,  but  he  always  does  it  differ- 
ently. Others  had  written  Gospels,  and  John  wrote  a 
Gospel ;  and  it  was  so  different  from  the  other  Gospels  as 
to  seem  like  another  order  of  literary  creation.  It  was 
a  biography  as  the  others  had  been,  but  it  was  a  biography 
of  the  spirit  more  than  of  the  external  life.  It  was  a 
history,  but  it  was  not  the  history  of  certain  happenings 
k/  so  much  as  it  was  the  history  of  a  heart.    Others  had  writ- 

ten letters  and  epistles,  and  John  writes  one  too,  but  it  is 
so  different  from  all  which  had  preceded  it  that  we  scarcely 
know  whether  it  belongs  in  the  same  category  with  them. 
As  Farrar  has  said :  "There  is  in  it  nothing  of  the  passionate 
personal  element  of  Paul's  letters ;  none  of  the  burning 
controversy,  of  the  subtle  dialectics,  of  the  elaborate  doc- 
trine, of  the  intense  appeal.  Nor  has  it  anything  of  the 
stately  eloquence  and  sustained  allegorizing  of  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews ;  nor  does  it  enunciate  the  stern  rules  of 
practical  ethics  like  James ;  nor,  again,  does  it  throb  with 
that  storm  of  moral  indignation  which  sweeps  through  the 


3  Enchir.  Bibl.,  p.  986. 

*  Geschichte  der  heil.  Schriften,  N.  T.,  p.  226. 

*  The  Epistles  of  St.  John,  p.  30. 
8  Works,  vol.  i,  p.  113. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  i6i 

Epistles   of   Peter   and   Jude.      Its   tone  and   manner   are 
wholly  different.'"^ 

Most  of  the  letters  of  Paul  were  occasioned  by  certain 
definite  events.  There  is  no  suggestion  of  any  particular 
occasion  for  the  writing  of  First  John.  It  might  have  been 
written  at  almost  any  time  and  in  almost  any  place  and 
under  almost  any  conditions.  Its  contents  are  suitable 
for  all  times  and  places  and  conditions  of  men.  Yet  Bishop 
Alexander  was  undoubtedly  right  when  he  said:  "It  is  a 
mistake  to  look  upon  the  First  Epistle  of  John  as  a  creed- 
less  composite  of  miscellaneous  sweetnesses,  a  disconnected 
rhapsody  upon  philanthropy.  And  it  will  be  well  to  enter 
upon  a  serious  perusal  of  it  with  a  conviction  that  it  did 
not  drop  from  the  sky  upon  an  unknown  place,  at  an  un- 
known time,  with  an  unknown  purpose."^  When  we  look 
into  the  letter  we  find  that  the  writer  of  it  is  addressing 
somebody  very  definitely  and  directly.  He  speaks  to  them 
as  "you"  thirty-six  times.  He  says  "I  write"  or  "I  wrote" 
thirteen  times.  He  calls  them  "my  little  children"  six 
times.  He  calls  them  "beloved"  six  times.^  He  evidently 
recognizes  a  personal  relation  existing  between  himself  and 
his  readers.  He  has  an  apostolic,  prophetic,  and  paternal 
interest  in  them.  He  knows  the  little  children,  the  young 
men,  and  the  fathers  among  them,  and  he  has  a  word  of 
counsel  for  each  and  all.  He  knows  that  there  have  been 
apostates  from  their  company  and  that  false  doctrines  have 
been  preached  to  them.^"  He  seems  to  prefer  the  abstract 
presentation  of  thought,  but  as  he  enunciates  his  general 
principles  he  evidently  has  some  definite  persons  in  mind 
who  are  to  apply  these  principles  to  definite  historical  condi- 
tions. 


^  Messages  of  the  Books,  p.  479. 

8  Expositor's  Bible,  Commentary  on  the  Epistles  of  John,  p.  5. 

»7pd0w,  eypafa;  TCKvia,  watSia;  dyain}Tol,     Compare  Farrar,  o/>.  cit., 

474- 

">  I  John  2.  12-14,  I9i  26. 


I 

J 


162  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

What,  then,  shall  we  conclude  as  to  the  nature  of  this 
book?  I.  We  will  call  it  a  letter,  with  Diisterdieck, 
De  Wette,  Huther,  Ebrard,  Haupt,  Bleek,  Weiss,  Luthardt, 
Westcott,  Salmond,  and  others.  Diisterdieck  said,  "The 
whole  writing  rests  so  thoroughly  on  a  living  personal  rela- 
tion between  the  author  and  his  readers,  the  application  of 
the  written  exhortation  is  so  absolutely  personal,  that  this 
ground  is  enough  to  make  us  consider  the  writing  as  a 
genuine  letter/'i'-  Weiss  says,  "The  work  is  a  letter,  not 
a  treatise;  the  discussion  has  not  the  form  of  dialectic 
development  but  of  thoughtful  meditation  on  certain  great 
fundamental  truths." ^^  2.  While  we  call  it  a  letter,  we 
acknowledge  that  it  is  very  different  from  most  ancient 
letters  and  all  of  the  letters  of  the  New  Testament.  Farrar 
agrees:  "The  unconstrained  style,  the  informal  transitions, 
the  mingled  exhortations  all  show  that  it  is  a  letter.  At 
the  same  time  it  is  the  most  abstract  and  impersonal,  the 
most  independent  of  place  and  time  and  circumstance,  of 
all  the  writings  in  the  New  Testament."^^ 

3.  The  letter  is  not  written  to  those  at  a  distance,  but, 
rather,  to  those  who  were  living  in  the  writer's  own  diocese. 
It  was  Bengel  who  with  his  usual  insight  said  that  John 
seems  to  be  among  those  to  whom  he  is  writing,  and  that 
seems  to  us  to  fit  the  facts  of  the  case.  In  his  old  age 
John  was  the  recognized  chief  authority  in  the  church.  He 
was  the  bishop  resident  in  Asia  Minor.  He  was  so  old  that 
all  in  the  church,  fathers  and  sons  alike,  seemed  to  him  to  be 
little  children.  To  them  all  he  wrote  these  words  of  in- 
struction and  advice.  They  were  the  final  formulation  of 
his  faith.  They  were  his  seal  set  upon  the  testimony  of 
his  life  teaching.  They  summarized  all  he  had  said.  These 
younger  generations  might  read  these  words  and  recall 
his  voice  as  they  had  heard  him  utter  them.     They  might 

"  Quoted  in  The  Books  of  the  Bible,  p.  303. 

^  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  vol.  ii,  p.  183. 

12  Op.  cit.,  p.  474. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  163 

read  these  words  and  know  the  highest  reach  of  apostolic 
revelation.  This  little  book  would  be  the  last  will  and 
testament  of  the  last  of  the  apostles  to  the  Christian  Church. 
It  would  go  along  with  his  Gospel  as  the  church's  most 
precious  heritage.  It  would  appeal  to  the  Christians  of  all 
generations  as  directly  and  as  intimately  as  to  those  of 
John's  own  day. 

II.     Relation  to  the  Fourth  Gospel 

What  is  the  relation  of  the  First  Epistle  to  the  fourth 
Gospel  ? 

A.  In  attempting  to  answer  that  question  we  call  atten- 
tion to  the  following  resemblances,  i.  The  two  writ- 
ings are  alike  in  their  literary  style,  (i)  We  have  seen 
what  a  fondness  John  had  in  the  fourth  Gospel  for  the 
repetition  of  the  number  three  in  the  arrangement  of  his 
material.  The  same  thing  is  true  of  this  epistle.  Most  of 
the  commentators  decide  that  all  of  its  contents  center 
about  the  three  propositions,  God  is  light,  God  is  righteous- 
ness, God  is  love.  If  we  agree  to  this  as  the  general  out- 
line, it  would  be  equally  easy  to  show  that  the  same  triple 
arrangement  of  thought  ruled  in  the  subdivisions,  and  even 
in  the  single  paragraphs  of  the  epistle. 

(2)  We  have  the  same  meagerness  of  connecting 
particles  which  we  found  characteristic  of  the  fourth 
Gospel.  For  the  most  part  the  sentences  are  connected  by 
"and"  alone.  "And  if  any  man  sin,  we  have  an  Advocate. 
And  he  is  the  propitiation.  And  in  this  we  know.  And 
this  is  the  message.  And  this  is  the  commandment.  And 
this  is  the  witness. "^^  (3)  We  find  that  the  same  noun  is 
repeated,  instead  of  being  replaced  by  the  pronoun  referring 
to  it  in  the  epistle,  as  in  the  fourth  Gospel.  "In  the  begin- 
ning was  the  Logos,  and  the  Logos  was  with  God,  and 
the  Logos  was  God."    We  would  have  said,  "He  was  with 


"  I  John  I.  5;  2.  1-3;  3.  23;  5.  II. 


i64  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

God  and  he  was  God."  In  the  epistle  we  read,  "He  that 
hateth  his  brother  is  in  the  darkness,  and  walketh  in  the 
darkness,  .  .  .  because  the  darkness  hath  bhnded  his 
eyes."^^  We  would  have  said,  "It  hath  blinded  his  eyes." 
"Love  not  the  world,  neither  the  things  that  are  in  the 
world,"  John  says.^**  We  would  have  said,  "Neither  the 
things  that  are  in  it." 

(4)  Sometimes  this  repetition  of  the  same  word  extends 
through  an  entire  paragraph  and  becomes  the  chain  linking 
the  whole  together.  We  find  this  in  the  Gospel.^'^  We 
see  it  again  in  the  epistle,  "Beloved,  let  us  love  one  another : 
for  love  is  of  God ;  and  every  one  that  loveth  is  begotten  of 
God,  and  knoweth  God.  He  that  loveth  not  knoweth  not 
God;  for  God  is  love.  Herein  was  the  love  of  God  mani- 
fested in  us,  that  God  hath  sent  his  only-begotten  Son  into 
the  world  that  we  might  live  through  him.  Herein  is  love, 
not  that  we  loved  God,  but  that  he  loved  us,  and  sent  his  Son 
to  be  the  propitiation  for  our  sins.  Beloved,  if  God  so  loved 
us,  we  also  ought  to  love  one  another.  No  man  hath  beheld 
God  at  any  time:  if  we  love  one  another,  God  abideth 
in  us,  and  his  love  is  perfected  in  us."i^  See  how  the 
changes  are  rung  upon  the  word  "love."  No  lovelorn 
swain  of  the  sentimental  romance  could  be  more  monoto- 
nous in  his  insistence  upon  the  dominant  character  of  his 
love.  It  is  the  divine  and  eternal  and  spiritual  love  of 
which  John  writes,  but  he  is  just  as  fervid  in  his  avowal 
of  its  necessity  and  its  supremacy  as  any  victim  of  an 
earthly  passion  could  be. 

In  the  fifth  chapter  of  the  epistle  we  have  the  same 
recurrence  of  the  word  "witness"  which  we  found  in  the 
fifth  chapter  of  the  fourth  Gospel,  "And  it  is  the  Spirit 
that  beareth  witness,  because  the  Spirit  is  the  truth.  For 
there  are  three  who  bear  witness,  the  Spirit,  and  the  water, 
and  the  blood :  and  the  three  agree  in  one.     If  we  receive 

^  I  John  2.  II.  "  John  5.  31-39. 

"  I  John  2.  15.  ^  I  John  4.  7-12. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  165 

the  witness  of  men,  the  witness  of  God  is  greater :  for  the 
witness  of  God  is  this,  that  he  hath  borne  witness  concern- 
ing his  Son.  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  of  God  hath 
the  witness  in  him:  he  that  beHeveth  not  God  hath  made 
him  a  Har;  because  he  hath  not  beHeved  in  the  witness 
that  God  hath  borne  concerning  his  Son.  And  the  witness 
is  this,  that  God  gave  unto  us  eternal  life,  and  this  life  is 
in  his  Son."i9 

(5)  We  find  the  same  preference  for  the  abstract  in  the 
epistle  and  in  the  Gospel,  as  in  the  phrases,  "to  be  of  God, 
to  abide  in  love,  to  have  life,  to  do  sin,  to  do  lawlessness, 
to  do  righteousness,  to  do  the  truth."  To  John's  mind  the 
truth  was  not  only  to  be  spoken,  but  to  be  done.  It  was 
to  be  lived.  It  was  to  be  exemplified  in  daily  conduct.  It 
was  to  be  realized  in  action.  The  general  expression,  "to 
do  the  truth,"  stood  for  any  number  of  individual  concrete 
illustrations.  The  single  fact  never  is  of  so  much  interest 
to  John  as  a  general  truth.  (6)  We  find  the  same  limited 
vocabulary  in  both  Gospel  and  epistle,  the  same  favorite 
words  of  broadest  content  and  capable  of  the  most  varied 
meaning.  Life,  light,  love,  darkness,  death,  world,  fellow- 
ship, truth — these  are  the  words  which  John  uses  again 
and  again,  presenting  them  from  different  points  of  view, 
"as  if  a  man  allowed  a  diamond  to  play  in  ever-different 
light,"  Luthardt  once  said.  They  are  John's  jewels,  and 
he  treasures  them  at  their  true  worth.  It  has  been  estimated 
that  there  are  two  hundred  and  ninety-five  different  words 
in  the  epistle  and  that  of  these  only  sixty-nine  are  not  to  be 
found  also  in  the  Gospel. 

(7)  We  find  the  same  sharp  contrasts  in  both  books. 
Here  in  the  epistle  we  have  arrayed  over  against  each  other 
in  irreconcilable  antagonism,  death  and  life,  darkness  and 
light,  confidence  and  fear,  righteousness  and  unrighteous- 
ness, Christ  and  antichrist,  love  of  God  and  love  of  the 

"I  John  5.  7-1 1. 


i66  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

world,  believers  and  the  world,  the  children  of  God  and 
the  children  of  the  devil.  (8)  In  the  fourth  Gospel  we 
read,  "He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath  eternal  life;  but 
he  that  obeyeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life/'^o  In  the 
epistle  we  find  the  same  custom  of  stating  things  positively 
and  then  negatively,  as  follows,  "God  is  light,  and  in  him 
is  no  darkness  at  all,"  "We  lie,  and  do  not  the  truth,"  "We 
deceive  ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us,"  "He  ...  is 
a  liar,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  him,"  "His  anointing  ...  is 
true,  and  is  no  lie,"  and,  paralleling  the  passage  we  quoted 
from  the  Gospel,  "He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  the  life;  he 
that  hath  not  the  Son  of  God  hath  not  the  life."2i  (9)  The 
two  writings  have  the  same  profundity  of  thought  and 
simplicity  of  language  combined  in  a  style  which  is  un- 
paralleled and  inimitable.  In  minor  details  and  in  general 
characteristics  the  style  of  these  two  books  is  peculiar. 

Church  tradition  has  found  only  one  hand  to  which  to 
ascribe  them.  If  John  did  not  write  them,  the  greatest 
genius  of  the  apostolic  age  is  without  a  name  in  church 
history,  while  scores  of  lesser  literary  lights  are  well  known. 
If  John  wrote  them,  the  greatest  philosopher  and  theologian 
and  saint  and  seer  of  the  apostolic  company  has  left  us  in 
them  a  monument  worthy  of  himself  and  his  Master;  for 
there  are  no  two  books  in  the  New  Testament  which  we 
would  exchange  for  these. 

2.  The  doctrines  they  present  are  fundamentally  the 
same,  (i)  The  Logos  doctrine  of  the  two  Prologues  is 
identical  and  has  no  parallel  in  any  other  New  Testament 
books.  (2)  Christ  is  called  a  Paraclete  in  these  two  books 
alone.  The  Holy  Spirit  is  another  Paraclete.^^  (3)  Jesus 
is  called  the  Only  Begotten  Son  in  these  two  books  alone.^^ 
(4)  According  to  these  two  books,  eternal  life  begins  on 

20  John  3.  36. 

"  I  John  I.  5,  6,  8;  2.  4,  27;  5.  12. 

**  John  14.  16;  I  John  2.  i. 

^  John  I.  18;  3.  16,  18;  I  John  4.  9. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  167 

earth  and  goes  on  without  interruption  into  heaven.  Eter- 
nal life  is  the  present  possession  of  the  Christian  believer. 
The  phrase  "eternal  life"  is  found  only  once  in  the  Old 
Testament — Dan.  12.  2.  It  occurs  forty- four  times  in  the 
New  Testament  and  more  than  half  of  these  occurrences 
are  found  in  these  two  books.  The  word  "heaven"  and 
the  word  "glory"  are  not  found  in  this  First  Epistle,  prob- 
ably because  the  words  "eternal  life"  represented  to  John 
all  that  the  other  words  implied.  To  John,  "the  road  to 
heaven  lies  through  heaven,  and  all  the  way  to  heaven  is 
heaven." 

(5)  In  both  books  John  draws  the  line  of  cleavage  be- 
tween believers  and  unbelievers,  as  the  children  of  God 
and  the  children  of  the  devil.  They  are  both  manifest  to 
themselves  by  the  Spirit's  presence  or  by  the  lack  of  it 
and  to  others  by  righteousness  of  daily  life  or  by  the  lack 
of  it.  There  are  the  two  armies,  and  only  two.  There 
are  two  leaders,  and  only  two.  They  forever  are  opposed 
to  each  other.  There  is  no  neutral  ground.  There  is  no 
compromise  possible.  The  feud  is  internecine.  No  man 
ever  can  flee  from  the  responsibilities  the  warfare  puts 
upon  him.  We  are  all  of  us  conscripts  in  this  spiritual  war. 
There  is  no  possibility  of  the  purchase  of  a  substitute.  We 
are  drafted  and  must  fight  on  the  field.  We  may  take  the 
standard  we  choose.  We  may  follow  the  leader  we  prefer. 
We  may  determine  to  what  host  we  belong.  But  whether 
we  will  or  will  not,  the  choice  of  service  is  imperative  and 
inevitable.  To-day  we  are  enrolled,  in  the  books  of  record 
kept  with  an  accuracy  divine.  To-day  it  is  decided  that 
to  this  army  or  to  that  our  influence  is  given.  That  is  the 
conception  of  a  Boanerges,  to  whom  all  compromise  is 
contemptible  cowardice  and  who  would  have  all  men  to 
be  as  out-and-out  as  himself. 

3.  The  same  personal  characteristics  of  the  author  are 
apparent  in  these  two  books.  ( i )  The  author's  name  does 
not  appear  in  either  book.    He  hides  himself  in  all  modesty 


V 


i68  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

while  he  claims  to  be  an  eyewitness  and  to  proclaim  the 
absolute  truth.  (2)  He  is  a  Boanerges  in  the  decisiveness 
and  the  bitterness  of  his  assault  upon  all  depravers  of  the 
truth  and  all  who  indulge  in  Satanic  sin.  He  calls  a  lie 
a  lie,  and  he  never  allows  that  darkness  is  light  or  twilight. 
It  is  always  black  to  him.  The  people  who  come  around 
with  new  doctrines,  denying  the  reality  of  the  incarnation, 
are  not  interesting  or  tolerable  to  John.  They  are  liars  and 
antichrists  and  children  of  the  devil.  He  is  the  Apostle  of 
Love,  but  he  does  not  love  laxity.  He  loves  only  that 
which  is  lovely,  and  he  hates  with  a  white-hot  hatred  every- 
thing which  tends  to  mar  and  destroy  the  loveliness  of  the 
pure  and  the  good. 

(3)  He  is  absolutely  sure  of  the  truth.  He  knows  what 
he  is  talking  about.  He  knows  that  he  is  dealing  with 
primary  principles  and  that  there  are  no  exceptions.  He 
has  been  taught  by  intuition  and  confirmed  in  his  convic- 
tions by  long  experience.  He  has  the  assurance  of  one 
who  has  grasped  realities  and  tested  the  certainties  until 
there  is  no  more  room  for  doubt  in  his  heart.  Doubt  is 
one  of  the  impossibilities.  "We  are  reminded  of  a  fine 
stroke  of  Bunyan,  in  his  allegory  of  The  Holy  War,  when 
he  names  Captain  Experience  among  the  chief  officers  who 
routed  and  slew  the  army  of  ten  thousand  Doubters  that 
came  against  the  city  of  Mansoul.  There  is  nothing  so 
impervious  to  doubts  as  a  sound  personal  experience  of 
Christ's  saving  power  and  love."^*  From  this  stronghold 
of  personal  experience  John  spoke.  He  knew ;  and  he  was 
contented  with  stating  the  fact. 

4.  The  method  of  dealing  with  error  and  of  presenting 
the  truth  is  the  same  in  the  two  books.  As  Bishop  Mc- 
Dowell has  said :  "John  does  not  argue  against  people 
living  in  the  dark.  He  simply  floods  the  world  with  light, 
and  a  heretic  must  hunt  a  hole  if  he  wants  darkness.''^^ 

2*  Donald  Fraser,  Lecttires  on  the  Bible,  vol.  ii,  p.  289. 
^  Ilifif  School  Studies,  p.  72. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  169 

The  similarity  of  style,  the  identity  of  doctrine,  the  Hke 
personal  characteristics,  and  the  same  method  of  expression 
would  seem  to  settle  the  question  as  to  single  authorship. 

5.  When  we  add  to  these  marks  of  identification  the  fact 
that  there  are  at  least  thirty-five  passages  in  which  the 
thought  is  closely  parallel  in  the  two  books,  and  that  in 
some  of  these  cases  the  same  words  and  phrases  are  used, 
we  must  conclude  either  that  one  man  wrote  both  books 
or  that  the  writer  of  the  epistle  was  a  wholesale  and  un- 
conscionable plagiarist.^s  The  beginning  verses  have  the 
same  ideas,  and  the  two  books  close  with  the  same  thought. 
Almost  all  the  critics  therefore,  whether  they  believe  the 
apostle  John  or  some  one  else  wrote  these  books,  agree  in 
the  conclusion  that  the  same  hand  is  responsible  for  both 
the  Gospel  and  the  epistle. 

Westcott  declares,  "The  epistle  is  so  closely  connected 
with  the  fourth  Gospel  in  vocabulary,  style,  thought,  and 
scope,  that  these  two  books  cannot  but  be  regarded  as  works 
of  the  same  author."  Law,  in  his  volume  called  The  Tests 
of  Life,  which  is  a  very  able  commentary  on  the  First 
Epistle,  concludes:  "Prima  facie, ^  the  case  for  identity 
of  authorship  is  overwhelmingly  strong.  On  internal 
grounds,  it  would  appear  much  more  feasible  to  assign 
any  two  of  Shakespeare's  plays  to  different  authors, 
than  the  Gospel  and  the  First  Epistle  of  John.  They  are 
equally  saturated  with  that  spiritual  and  theological  atmos- 
phere, they  are  equally  characterized  by  that  type  of 
thought,  which  we  call  Johannine,  and  which  presents  an 
interpretation  of  Christianity  not  less  original  and  distinc- 
tive than  Paulinism.  ...  In  short,  it  seems  impossible  to 
conceive  of  two  mdependent  literary  productions  having 
a  more  intimate  affinity.    The  relation  between  them  is,  in 


^«  Compare  John  i.  1-4  with  i  John  i.  1-4,  and  John  I.  18  with 
I  John  4.  12,  and  John  3.  36  with  i  John  5.  12,  and  John  20.  31  with 
I  John  5.  13. 


I70  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

every  way,  closer  than  that  between  the  third  Gospel  and 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  where  the  identity  of  authorship 
is  now  generally  admitted,  the  only  case  of  approximation 
to  it  being  that  of  the  Epistles  to  the  Ephesians  and  the 
Colossians"^'^  For  these  conclusions  the  evidence  is  fur- 
nished in  detail,  and  Law's  whole  chapter  on  the  "Relation 
of  the  Epistle  to  the  Fourth  Gospel"  is  worth  careful  study. 
Baur,  Pfleiderer,  H.  J.  Holtzmann,  Von  Soden,  and  others 
held  that  there  was  a  different  authorship  here,  but  even 
such  radical  critics  as  Jiilicher,  Wernle,  and  Wrede  have 
been  convinced  that  dual  authorship  is  impossible. 

B.  Having  noticed  their  likeness  to  each  other,  it  may  be 
well  for  us  to  point  out  some  differences  between  the  two 
books.  I.  We  have  seen  that  they  begin  with  the  same 
ideas.  The  form  in  which  these  ideas  are  presented  in  the 
Gospel  is  in  striking  contrast  with  that  in  the  epistle.  The 
Gospel  begins  with  a  series  of  short  sentences,  each  easily 
understood  and  complete  in  itself.  The  epistle  begins  with 
one  long  and  involved  sentence  with  a  broken  and  rather 
difficult  grammatical  construction.  A  parenthesis  cuts 
across  the  course  of  the  thought,  which  is  caught  up  again 
toward  the  close.  An  old  divine  says  that  the  epistle  is 
"prefaced  and  brought  in  with  more  magnificent  ceremony 
than  any  passage  in  Scripture."28  There  is  only  one  pas- 
sage like  it  in  all  of  John's  other  writing,  the  first  verses 
of  the  thirteenth  chapter  in  the  Gospel.  2.  There  is  not  a 
single  quotation  from  the  Old  Testament  in  the  epistle. 
The  Gospel  has  many  of  them.  There  are  references  to 
Old  Testament  characters  in  both.  3.  As  we  might  natu- 
rally expect,  the  epistle  has  much  less  of  historical  back- 
ground and  of  local  coloring  than  the  Gospel.  The  differ- 
ence in  the  character  of  the  two  writings  would  account 
for  this.    4.  Westcott  says  that  their  themes  are  different. 


"  Law,  The  Tests  of  Life,  pp.  340,  341. 
*8  Alexander,  op.  ciL,  p.  80. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  171 

"The  theme  of  the  Gospel  is,  Jesus  is  Christ;  the  theme 
of  the  epistle  is,  Christ  is  Jesus."^^  Law  draws  this  further 
distinction  between  them,  "The  Gospel  is  christocentric ; 
the  epistle,  theocentric.  In  the  one  is  given  the  concrete 
presentment  of  the  incarnate  Son ;  in  the  other  the  immedi- 
ate intuition  of  the  divine  nature  revealed  in  him.  While 
the  theme  common  to  both  is  the  'Word  of  life,'  the  special 
theme  of  the  Gospel  is  the  Word  who  reveals  and  imparts 
the  life;  in  the  epistle  it  is  the  life  revealed  and  imparted 
by  the  Word,  and  the  thought  of  the  indwelling  Christ  is 
naturally  carried  up  to  the  ultimate  truth  of  the  indwelling 
God."3« 

C.  We  have  not  yet  decided  what  relation  these  two  writ- 
ings were  intended  to  bear  to  each  other.  Lightfoot  thought 
that  the  epistle  was  planned  to  serve  as  an  introduction 
to  the  Gospel.  Hilgenfeld  said  it  was  the  pattern  upon 
which  the  Gospel  afterward  was  built.  Bleek,  Huther, 
Pfleiderer,  Zeller  thought  that  the  epistle  was  written  first. 
Others,  like  Bretschneider,  Ebrard,^^  Hug,^^  Hausrath, 
Hofmann,  Haupt,^^  and  Thiersch,  have  agreed  that  the 
epistle  was  a  dedicatory  writing  intended  to  accompany 
the  Gospel  wherever  it  went.  Baur  said  the  epistle  was 
simply  a  poor  copy  from  the  Gospel.  Augusti  and  Holtz- 
mann  called  it  a  summary  or  practical  setting  of  the  con- 
tents of  the  Gospel.  Others,  like  Michaelis,  Storr,  and 
Eichhorn,  are  content  to  name  the  epistle  a  companion  of 
the  Gospel  or  a  second  part  of  the  Gospel.  Liicke, 
De  Wette,  Reuss,  Schenkel  are  sure  of  the  priority  of  the 
Gospel.  Westcott  says,  "The  substance  of  the  Gospel  is 
a  commentary  on  the  epistle;  the  epistle  is  (so  to  speak) 


^  Commentary  on  John,  p.  Ixxxviii. 

^  International  Standard  Bible  Encyclopaedia,  p.  1703. 

'1  "A  companion-document."    Commentary  on  John's  Epistles,  p.  25. 

22  "A  supplement,"  Introduction  to  New  Testament,  vol.  ii,  p.  249. 

'3  "A  postscript,"  On  the  First  Epistle  of  John,  p.  374. 


172  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

the    condensed    moral    and    practical    application    of    the 
Gospel. "^'^ 

We  are  inclined  to  believe  that  the  epistle  was  written 
later  than  the  Gospel  and  was  designed  to  be  a  sort  of 
appendix  to  it.  We  agree  with  Bishop  Alexander  that 
"The  epistle  is  to  be  read  through  with  constant  reference 
to  the  Gospel.  There  is  a  vital  and  constant  connection. 
The  two  documents  not  only  touch  each  other  in  thought, 
but  interpenetrate  each  other;  and  the  epistle  is  constantly- 
suggesting  questions  which  the  Gospel  only  can  answer."^^ 
"The  epistle  is  intelligible,"  says  Haupt,  "only  if  we  suppose 
the  reader  to  possess  a  knowledge  of  the  Gospel,  not  only 
in  general,  but  also  in  detailed  expressions."^^  This  seems 
to  us  to  be  true  of  i  John  i.  1-4;  2.  7;  4.  17;  and  5.  6-8. 
In  any  case,  whether  the  epistle  is  a  preface  to  the  Gospel 
or,  as  we  suppose,  an  appendix  to  it,  these  two  books  stand 
together.  They  belong  to  the  same  family.  They  are  of 
one  blood.  Professor  Ramsay  says,  "No  two  works  in 
the  whole  range  of  literature  show  clearer  signs  of  the 
genius  of  one  writer,  and  no  other  pair  of  works  are  so 
completely  in  a  class  by  themselves,  apart  from  the  work 
of  their  own  and  every  other  time."^'^ 

III.     Genuineness  and  Date 

The  external  evidence  for  the  genuineness  of  the  epistle 
is  very  satisfactory.  Polycarp^^  and  Papias^^  quote  from 
it.  The  Muratorian  Fragment  bears  its  testimony  to  the 
authorship  of  the  apostle  John.  The  Peshito  and  the 
Itala  recognized  it.    Tertullian,^*^  Clement  of  Alexandria,'*^ 

^*  The  Epistles  of  John,  p.  xxx. 

^5  Op.  cit.,  p.  75. 

•■'8  The  First  Epistle  of  John,  p.  373. 

^^  The  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire,  p.  303. 

^  Ad  Phil.,  vii. 

^»  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.,  v,  20. 

^  Adv.  Prax.,  xv. 

"Strom.,  II,  15.     Paedag.,  Ill,  11. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  173 

Irenseus,*^  Origen,*^  Cyprian,*^  and  others  among  the 
church  Fathers  use  it  and  witness  to  its  composition  by 
John.  Even  Dr.  Samuel  Davidson  admits  that  "the  letter 
is  well  attested  by  the  voice  of  antiquity,  and  that,  as  far 
as  external  evidence  reaches,  its  authenticity  seems  to  be 
secure,"^^  and  Liicke  asserts,  "Incontestably,  our  epistle 
must  be  numbered  among  those  canonical  books  which  are 
most  strongly  upheld  by  ecclesiastical  tradition."'*®  We 
already  have  seen  that  the  internal  evidence  is  equally  good. 
Upon  the  basis  of  both  we  conclude  that  the  First  Epistle 
was  written  by  the  apostle  John  at  Ephesus  or  in  its  near 
neighborhood  some  time  during  the  last  decades  of  the 
first  century. 

IV.     Heresies  Combated 

Are  any  particular  heresies  aimed  at  in  this  epistle?  Baur 
said  that  the  author  of  the  epistle  wrote  against  the  Monta- 
nists,  and  Hilgenfeld  thought  that  he  aimed  at  the  Gnosti- 
cism of  the  second  century;  but  if  the  apostle  John  was  the 
author,  neither  of  these  suppositions  would  be  possible. 
We  must  look  for  heresies  which  were  prevalent  in  his 
time.  Oriental  dualism  undoubtedly  was  taught  in  Ephesus 
in  his  day.  It  regarded  evil  as  an  eternal  attribute  of 
matter.  This  philosophical  doctrine  naturally  led  to  theo- 
logical Docetism.  Jerome  says,  "When  the  blood  of  Christ 
was  but  lately  shed  and  the  apostles  were  still  in  Judaea, 
the  Lord's  body  was  asserted  to  be  a  phantom."^'^ 

If  the  flesh  was  material  and  evil  was  inherent  in  all 
matter,  then  a  genuine  incarnation  became  impossible.  The 
Divine  could  not  inhabit  a  vile  body.     It  would  be  better 

*!  Adv.  Haer.,  Ill,  16.  5. 
«  De  orat.,  0pp.  I,  p.  233. 
**  Epis.  24. 

^  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  vol.  ii,  p.  302. 
«  The  Epistles  of  John,  p.  7. 

"  Adv.  Lucifer,  xxiii.  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  vi, 
P-  332. 


174  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

to  say  that  the  body  of  Jesus  was  an  illusion  than  to  say 
it  was  real.  Then  the  sufferings  of  Jesus  were  only  appar- 
ent and  there  was  no  reality  about  them.  It  was  a  com- 
paratively easy  thing,  therefore,  for  God  to  save  men. 
Salvation  was  without  suffering  or  sacrifice  on  his  part, 
and  it  was  only  natural  that  it  should  be  concluded  that  it 
might  also  be  without  much  suffering  or  sacrifice  on  the 
part  of  man.  A  docetic  Christ  led  inevitably  to  a  docetic 
Christianity.  A  creed  with  its  emphasis  upon  emptiness 
led  to  conduct  equally  empty  of  moral  content  and  real 
worth. 

Those  who  embraced  this  philosophical-theological  atti- 
tude were  prone  to  slide  into  Antinomian  theories  and 
practices.  They  concluded  that  their  bodies  might  be  evil, 
but  their  spirits  were  independent  of  their  bodies  and 
undefiled  by  them.  When  they  once  were  regenerated  they 
remained  pure.  The  body  might  be  given  over  to  any 
indulgence  in  sensual  appetites  and  lusts  and  the  spirit  was 
uncontaminated  by  these  things.  A  jewel  might  lie  in  a 
dunghill,  and  be  just  as  much  of  a  jewel  as  in  any  other 
surroundings.  It  would  be  separate  and  secure  in  its  own 
value  wherever  it  was.  This  doctrine  made  possible 
drunken  and  licentious  professors  of  holiness.  Their 
spirits  were  holy  even  though  their  bodies  were  given  over 
to  sin.  The  body  was  doomed  to  sin,  and  it  never  could 
escape  from  it.  A  profession  of  faith,  an  initiation  into 
the  true  understanding  of  affairs,  was  equivalent,  therefore, 
to  a  license  to  any  degree  of  immorality  in  daily  life. 

We  know  that  Cerinthus  was  a  contemporary  of  the 
apostle  John.  We  know  that  he  was  a  Gnostic,  with  a 
pretense  to  superior  knowledge  in  spiritual  things.  We 
know  that  his  teaching  was  a  strange  mixture  of  Asiatic 
and  Jewish  and  Christian  elements.  We  know  that  he 
believed  that  the  Christ  was  to  be  distinguished  from  the 
man  Jesus.  The  former  was  a  heavenly  being,  while  the 
latter  was  an  earthly  being.    The  Christ  entered  into  Jesus 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  175 

at  the  time  of  the  baptism  in  the  Jordan  and  left  Jesus 
before  the  sufferings  of  the  crucifixion.  We  know  how 
the  apostle  John  hated  Cerinthus.  Schleiermacher,  Neander, 
Diisterdieck,  Ebrard,  Huther,  Haupt,  Keim,  Weiss,  Sal- 
mond,  and  others  think  this  epistle  was  written  to  an- 
tagonize Cerinthus.  We  know  that  it  is  adapted  to  antag- 
onize all  dualism  and  Docetism  and  Antinomianism  of 
whatever  kind. 

Whedon  says  it  was  written  as  "a  defense  of  Christian 
purity  from  sin  against  Gnostic  purity  in  sin."^^  Lipsius 
and  Holtzmann  conclude  that  the  epistle  attacks  the  dual- 
istic  Gnosticism,  which  was  Christologically  Docetic  and 
practically  Antinomian.  Michaelis,  Credner,  De  Wette, 
Hausrath,  Lucke,  Mangold,  Reuss,  and  Schmidt  agree. 
John  may  have  had  some  of  these  specific  forms  of  error 
in  mind  as  he  wrote;  or  he  may  have  thought  only  of  the 
inevitable  and  general  perversions  of  the  truth  to  which 
the  Christian  doctrine  was  liable  in  his  day  as  it  has  been 
in  all  the  ages  since  his  day.  Anybody  who  embodied  these 
errors  in  his  life  and  his  teaching  would  be  an  antichrist, 
a  liar,  and  a  child  of  the  devil.  There  have  been  many 
such  in  every  period  of  church  history. 

Against  them  all  this  epistle  has  lifted  up  its  testimony 
in  eternal  protest.  It  gives  no  uncertain  sound.  There  is 
no  writing  in  the  New  Testament  so  passionately  contro- 
versial as  this.  With  all  the  calmness  and  dignity  of  an 
apostle,  with  all  the  peace  of  one  who  has  attained  the 
incontrovertible  truth,  John  deals  sledgehammer  blows  at 
all  the  errorists  of  his  day.  All  the  heresies  of  history 
are  anticipated  and  answered  here.  The  church  might 
have  been  saved  from  them  if  all  Christians  had  studied 
and  appreciated  and  realized  within  themselves  the  truths 
of  this  epistle.  The  church  may  find  a  safeguard  here 
against  all  heresies  in  time  to  come.    Let  us  cherish  it  at 


*8  Commentary  on  New  Testament,  V,  p.  251. 


176  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

its  true  worth.    It  will  be  found  to  be  serviceable  according 
to  our  needs  to-day. 


V.    A  Final  and  Crowning  Revelation 

The  First  Epistle  of  John  is  generally  considered  to  be 
the  last  book  of  our  Scripture  to  be  written.  Jude  follows 
it  in  our  canon,  but  Jude  belongs  to  a  much  earlier  period. 
The  Apocalypse  comes  last  in  our  New  Testament,  but 
nobody  thinks  that  it  was  last  chronologically.  The 
arrangement  of  books  in  our  Bible  is  not  a  chronological 
arrangement.  The  Second  and  Third  Epistles  of  John 
are  not  second  and  third  in  time,  but  in  importance.  They 
doubtless  were  written  in  some  earlier  period  of  John's 
ministry  in  Ephesus.  The  First  Epistle  of  John  is  the  last 
message  from  God  to  man  contained  in  the  Sacred  Scrip- 
tures. It  is  the  last  word  of  the  Bible  revelation.  For 
the  last  time  an  inspired  writer  sits  down  to  add  some 
closing  words  to  the  Holy  Book.  Surely,  this  last  message 
will  be  a  precious  and  important  one. 

We  would  not  lose  one  word  of  those  final  conversa- 
tions of  Jesus  with  the  disciples  recorded  alone  in  the 
fourth  Gospel.  We  could  not  spare  one  word  of  this 
final  communication  of  the  apostolic  age,  this  last  publica- 
tion of  authoritative  inspired  and  canonical  truth.  We 
sympathize  with  the  feeling  of  Chrysostom  when  he  speaks 
of  the  writings  of  John:  "Wherefore,  as  if  we  all  at  once 
saw  one  stooping  down  from  yonder  heaven,  and  promising 
to  tell  us  truly  of  things  there,  we  should  all  flock  to  listen 
to  him,  so  let  us  now  dispose  ourselves.  For  it  is  from 
up  there  that  this  man  speaks  down  to  us.  .  .  .  All  that  he 
utters  is  with  the  steadfast  accuracy  of  truth,  and  as  if 
he  stood  upon  a  rock  he  budges  not.  All  time  is  his  wit- 
ness. Seest  thou  the  boldness,  and  the  great  authority  of 
his  words ! — how  he  utters  nothing  by  way  of  doubtful 
conjectures,  but  all  demonstratively,  as  if  passing  sentence. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  177 

Very  lofty  is  this  apostle  and  full  of  dogmas,  and  lingers 
over  them  more  than  over  other  things!"'*^  What  Chrys- 
ostom  said  applies  both  to  the  style  and  the  contents  of 
this  epistle.  It  contains  a  most  remarkable  series  of  state- 
ments concerning  the  most  fundamental  facts  of  our  faith. 
No  other  book  in  the  Bible  contains  a  larger  number  of 
the  essentials  in  the  gospel  put  so  compactly  and  clearly. 

VI.    The  Epistle  of  Love 

The  word  "love"  occurs  more  often  in  this  epistle  than 
in  any  other  book  of  the  New  Testament  and  the  verb  "to 
love"  occurs  twice  as  many  times  in  this  epistle  as  in  any 
other  book  of  the  New  Testament,  except  the  Gospel  ac- 
cording to  John.  Therefore  the  epistle  has  been  called 
the  Epistle  of  Love.  Love  dominates  the  thought  from 
beginning  to  end.  Six  times  John  calls  his  readers,  ayanijToi, 
"beloved."  Twelve  times  the  noun  dydnrj  is  found.  The 
verb  dyando)  is  repeated  twenty-seven  times.  Fifty-one 
times  in  all  the  word  "love"  with  its  derivatives  occurs,  and 
the  repetition  of  the  word  is  only  an  indication  of  the  con- 
tinuous burden  of  the  epistle.  Augustine  said,  "Locutus 
est  multa,  et  prope  omnia  de  caritate" — "He  has  said  many 
things,  and  almost  all  about  love."  Luther  said,  "The  main 
substance  of  this  epistle  relates  to  love."  Calvin  said,  "It 
contains  doctrine  with  exhortations,  but  in  no  continuous 
order.  He  especially  insists  upon  brotherly  love,  but 
touches  also  briefly  upon  other  things. "^*^ 

The  brotherly  love  taught  in  this  epistle  may  have  the 
warmest  affection  in  it  or  it  may  not.  It  may  include 
passionate  regard  or  it  may  not.  It  can  be  independent 
of  any  passing  emotion.  It  rests  upon  deep-seated  principle. 
It  is  a  feeling  of  affinity  with  and  obligation  to  the  race. 


*»  In  Johan.  Homil,  I,  II,  III.     Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers, 
First  Series,  vol.  xiv,  pp.  2,  5. 
"  Farrar,  op.  cit.,  p.  485. 


J 


178  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

It  is  unselfish  devotion  to  the  highest  interests  of  others 
and  of  all.  It  is  the  fixed  purpose  to  help  everybody  and 
to  do  all  we  can  to  make  the  world  better  by  making  every 
man  good.  It  will  feed  an  enemy  when  he  is  hungry  and 
give  him  drink  when  he  is  thirsty.  It  will  suffer  long  with 
him  and  be  kind  to  him.  It  will  bear  all  things,  believe 
all  things,  hope  all  things,  endure  all  things.  It  never  will 
fail,  even  as  Christ's  love  never  failed.  What  is  the  use 
of  attempting  to  define  it?  The  best  definition  of  it  is  to 
be  found  in  the  life  of  Jesus.  The  best  personal  exhibition 
of  it  will  be  found  in  the  life  of  the  man  who  walks  even 
as  Jesus  walked.  No  man  in  himself  can  attain  unto  it. 
This  love  must  come  from  God,  and  from  him  alone.  He 
enables  us  to  love  as  he  enabled  Jesus  to  love.  All  love 
is  from  him.  Jesus  said,  "God  is  your  Father,"  and  that 
was  a  great  revelation.  John  says,  "God  is  love,"  and  that 
is  the  final  revelation  of  the  Holy  Book  concerning  God 
the  Father  revealed  through  Jesus  Christ. 

John  is  responsible  for  each  of  those  three  remarkable 
four- word  statements  of  the  essential  being  of  God.  The 
first  he  quotes  from  the  lips  of  Jesus  in  the  Gospel,  "God 
is  a  spirit."  The  other  two  occur  in  this  epistle,  "God  is 
light,"  and  finally  "God  is  love."  It  is  the  climaxing  truth 
of  the  New  Testament,  the  final,  culminating,  unapproach- 
able formulation  of  our  faith.  There  is  no  higher  truth 
contained  in  the  Book.  This  is  the  Kohinoor  of  revelation. 
This  is  our  incomparable  gospel  to  men.  Archbishop 
Trench  was  inspired  to  put  it  into  poetry  which  ought  to 
be  committed  to  memory  or  cherished  in  heart  by  every 
ambassador  from  God  to  men. 

I  say  to  thee,  do  thou  repeat 

To  the  first  man  thou  mayest  meet 

In  lane,  highway,  or  open  street, 

That  he,  and  we,  and  all  men  move 

Under  a  canopy  of  love 

As  broad  as  the  blue  sky  above. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  179 


And — ere  thou  leave  him — say  thou  this, 
Yet  one  word  more — they  only  miss 
The  winning  of  that  finaJ  bliss, 

Who  will  not  count  it  true,  that  love, 
Blessing,  not  cursing,  rules  above — 
And  that  in  it  we  live  and  move. 

And  one  thing  further  make  him  know. 
That  to  believe  these  things  are  so, 
This  firm  faith  never  to  forego — 

Despite  of  all  that  seems  at  strife 
With  blessing — all  with  curses  rife — 
That  this  is  blessing — this  is  life! 


All  other  revealed  truth  must  be  coordinated  with  this 
and  subordinated  to  it.  God  is  Spirit — that  is  of  interest 
to  the  metaphysicians  and  the  philosophers.  God  is  light 
— that  is  of  interest  to  all  seekers  after  the  truth  and  all 
pilgrims  toward  the  Holy  City.  God  is  love — that  is  of 
interest  to  all  alike,  just  as  much  to  those  who  never  heard 
of  metaphysics  and  philosophy  as  to  those  who  have,  just 
as  much  to  the  multitudes  dwelling  in  dense  ignorance  and 
the  throngs  crowding  the  broad  and  downward  way  as  to 
the  saints  who  toil  up  the  straight  and  narrow  path.  From 
everlasting  to  everlasting  God  is  love  and  nothing  but  love. 

Love  is  not  one  of  God's  attributes.  It  is  the  essence 
of  his  being.  It  is  the  center  from  which  all  God's  attri- 
butes spring.  It  is  their  basis  and  their  source.  It  is  the 
final  explanation  of  all  which  God  has  done  or  may  do. 
It  is  the  one  fact  to  which  Christian  faith  must  cling  in 
the  face  of  all  the  mysteries  of  Providence  and  all  the 
untoward  circumstances  of  individual  experience  or  world 
history.  God  is  Everlasting  and  Unfailing  Love,  and, 
therefore,  love  is  the  law  of  this  universe,  and  it  is  the  will 
of  our  God  that  all  men  shall  share  in  his  love  and  in  all 
of  its  benefits.  All  is  love  and  all  is  law.  All  law  is  of 
love.  Augustine  said,  "If  nothing  whatever  throughout  the 
other  pages  of  Scripture  were  said  in  praise  of  love,  and 


/ 


i8o  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

this  one  thing  only  were  all  we  were  told  by  the  voice  of 
the  Spirit  of  God,  'For  God  is  love/  nothing  more  ought 
we  to  require."  This  epistle  shows  love  to  be  the  central 
fact  in  the  universe,  the  central  truth  of  Christian  theology, 
and  the  central  grace  in  the  Christian  life.  It  may  well 
be  called  the  Epistle  of  Love. 

VII.    The  Epistle  of  Knowledge 

No  book  in  the  Bible  puts  a  higher  premium  upon 
knowledge  than  this  epistle  does.  Some  have  called  it  the 
Epistle  of  Knowledge  and  have  tried  to  show  that  all  its 
contents  could  be  congregated  about  this  point.  There 
were  Gnostics  in  Ephesus  who  claimed  to  know  all  the 
mysteries  of  the  truth.  John  gave  them  to  understand 
that  the  Christians  could  be  Gnostics  too,  and  he  declares 
that  the  Christian  Gnostics  knew  all  spiritual  truth,  "Ye 
have  an  anointing  from  the  Holy  One,  and  ye  know  all 
things."^!  Tauler  the  mystic  said,  "The  Holy  Ghost  will 
not  teach  us  all  things,  so  that  we  shall  know  whether 
there  shall  be  a  good  harvest  and  vintage,  whether  bread 
will  be  dear  or  cheap,  whether  the  present  war  will  come 
to  an  end  soon;  but  all  things  which  we  can  need  for  a 
perfect  life  and  for  a  knowledge  of  the  hidden  truth  of 
God." 

Knowledge  is  power.  It  always  has  been  and  it  always 
will  be.  Therefore  all  men  always  have  been  desirous  to 
know  all  things.  However,  there  are  some  things  which 
we  can  go  without  knowing,  if  need  be.  It  is  not  necessary 
that  every  man  shall  know  how  many  bones  there  are  in 
a  fish's  back  or  how  many  rings  there  are  about  Saturn. 
It  is  not  necessary  that  every  man  shall  know  all  about 
the  megalosaurus  or  the  primitive  protoplasm.  But  it 
is  an  absolute  necessity  for  his  present  and  his  future 
welfare  that  he  know  those  things  which  pertain  to  the 

"  I  John  2.  20. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  i8i 

right  relationship  between  his  soul  and  his  God.  There 
must  be  a  certainty  and  sufficiency  of  knowledge  concern- 
ing his  spiritual  past,  present,  and  future  or  he  dwells  in 
culpable  ignorance  here  and  may  go  into  denser  darkness 
hereafter.  John  says  that  we  may  be  anointed  and  know 
all  these  things ;  all  things  which  affect  the  soul's  salvation, 
all  necessary  knowledge  concerning  the  will  of  our  God 
and  our  disposition  toward  him.  This  is  the  really  im- 
portant knowledge,  and  in  this  field  there  need  be  no  mental 
uncertainty,  there  need  be  no  manner  of  doubt.  In  John's 
estimation  all  other  knowledge  drops  out  of  account.  It 
will  be  partial  and  unsatisfactory  at  the  best.  It  will  be 
surrounded  by  mystery  on  every  side ;  but  in  this  most 
essential  knowledge  of  all  unto  man  John  says  there  may 
be  perfect  assurance  in  which  the  mind  and  heart  and  soul, 
in  which  the  man  entire  can  rest  in  complete  confidence, 
in  entire  satisfaction,  in  perfect  peace. 

John  believed  in  a  knowable  salvation,  as  firmly  as  John 
Wesley  did.  It  was  the  power  of  this  primitive  preaching 
of  the  Christian  faith  that  it  preached  great  realities  which 
could  be  tested  and  proved  in  personal  experience.  It  pro- 
claimed a  salvation  which  a  man  could  possess  and  know. 
That  was  the  power  in  the  preaching  of  the  Wesleyan 
revival.  A  type  of  Christianity  had  come  into  general 
acceptation  which  could  be  represented  as  believing  con- 
cerning a  Christian  experience:  "If  you  seek  it,  you  cannot 
find  it;  if  you  have  it,  you  will  not  know  it;  and  if  you 
lose  it,  you  never  had  it."  This  whole  epistle  is  a  protest 
against  any  such  perversion  of  Christian  truth.  Twenty- 
five  times  in  the  epistle  John  uses  the  verb  "to  know."  All 
through  the  epistle  he  emphasizes  the  certainty  and  suffi- 
ciency of  our  knowledge  in  spiritual  things. 

It  is  the  result  of  our  anointing.  In  the  Old  Testament 
times  the  anointing  was  given  to  special  individuals,  and 
they  were  thus  inducted  into  one  of  the  three  typical  offices 
of  the  early  kingdom.  A  man  was  anointed  to  be  a  prophet ; 


i82  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

he  was  anointed  to  be  a  priest;  he  was  anointed  to  be  a 
king.  All  the  nation  understood  that  these  anointings  were 
typical  of  the  higher  anointing  which  should  be  given  to 
the  Messias  when  he  came,  by  virtue  of  which  he  was  to 
be  both  Prophet,  Priest,  and  King,  and  so  worthy  to  bear 
that  name,  the  Messias,  the  Anointed  One,  Jesus  came, 
and  gathered  up  into  himself  all  the  gifts  and  graces  of 
the  three  anointings;  and  he  did  this,  John  says,  only  that 
he  might  scatter  them  abroad  again  among  all  his  people. 
The  anointing  of  the  Holy  One  was  to  be  given  to  all  the 
followers  of  the  Christ.  Henceforth  there  would  be  no 
chosen  prophets  to  whom  alone  the  Lord's  will  would  be 
made  known ;  but  all  would  know  him  from  the  least  to  the 
greatest,  and  all  would  preach  the  glad  gospel  as  authorized 
messengers.  Henceforth  the  Levitical  priesthood  should 
perish,  but  the  royal  priesthood  of  the  universal  Christian 
Church  should  be  established  in  its  stead.  Henceforth  no 
single  king  should  hold  a  scepter  to  rule,  but  every  fol- 
lower of  the  Christ  should  be  blessed  with  royal  preroga- 
tive. Prophets,  priests,  and  kings,  the  members  of  the 
Christian  Church  from  Pentecost  to  Judgment  Day,  should 
dwell  in  no  uncertainty,  should  be  blessed  with  a  fullness 
of  light,  should  stand  in  full  assurance  of  the  knowledge 
of  the  truth.  The  triple  anointing  of  the  Holy  One  should 
be  upon  them,  and  they  should  know  all  things. 

See  how  John  illustrates  his  meaning  in  five  statements 
in  the  third  chapter  of  this  epistle.  "Ye  know  that  he 
was  manifested  to  take  away  sins."^^  "We  know  that 
we  have  passed  out  of  death  into  life."^^  "Hereby  shall 
we  know  that  we  are  of  the  truth,  and  shall  assure  our 
heart  before  him."^^  "Hereby  we  know  that  he  abideth 
in  us,  by  the  Spirit  which  he  gave  us,"^^  "-yye  know 
that  ...  we  shall  be  like  him;  for  we  shall  see  him  even 


«  I  John  3.  5.  "  I  John  3.  19, 

"  I  John  3.  14.  65  I  John  3.  24. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  183 

as  he  is."^^  John  says  that  in  every  stage  of  Christian 
experience  there  is  an  absolute  certainty  of  knowledge;  in 
conviction,  in  conversion,  in  the  full  assurance  of  faith, 
in  the  abiding  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit  or  present  sancti- 
fication,  in  the  glorification  which  lies  beyond.  John  says 
"We  know"  concerning  all  of  these.  He  says  "We  know" 
seventeen  times  in  this  epistle,  and  "Ye  know"  eight  times. 
It  does  seem  that  it  might  be  called  "An  Epistle  on  the 
Subject  of  Christian  Knowledge." 

John  closes  the  book  with  three  affirmations  which  sum 
up  the  leading  thoughts  of  the  epistle.^'^  They  set  forth 
the  purity,  the  privilege,  and  the  Presence  which  charac- 
terize the  Christian  life.  Concerning  each  of  these  John 
says,  "We  know."  It  is  as  though  he  set  the  seal  of  uni- 
versal Christian  consciousness  upon  the  conclusions  set 
forth  in  his  book.  This  and  this  and  this  are  settled  mat- 
ters. We  know  that  these  three  things  are  true.  "We 
know  that  whosoever  is  begotten  of  God  sinneth  not;  but 
he  that  was  begotten  of  God  keepeth  himself,  and  the  evil 
one  toucheth  him  not."  We  know  that  purity  is  possible 
and  victory  is  assured.  "We  know  that  we  are  of  God, 
and  the  whole  world  lieth  in  the  evil  one."  We  know  our 
transcendent  privilege  in  fellowship  with  the  Father  and 
in  our  rescue  from  Satan's  power.  "We  know  that  the 
Son  of  God  is  come,  and  hath  given  us  an  understanding, 
that  we  may  know  him  that  is  true,  and  we  are  in  him 
that  is  true,  even  in  his  Son  Jesus  Christ.  This  is  the  true 
God  and  eternal  life."  We  know  the  Presence  who  makes 
our  Christian  life  possible  and  permanent.  He  is  true. 
He  has  the  truth.  He  gives  us  an  understanding.  He 
enables  us  to  know.  That  is  our  blessedness — to  know 
and  to  live.  That  sums  it  all  up;  knowledge,  understand- 
ing, truth,  and  life  in  the  eternal  enjoyment  of  these.    We 


"^  I  John  3.  2. 

"  I  John  5.  18,  19,  20. 


i84  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

know  and  we  know  that  we  know ;  that  was  John's  convic- 
tion as  to  all  spiritual  truth  and  that  was  his  challenge  to 
all  Gnostics,  all  the  Illuminati,  all  the  advanced  thinkers 
of  his  own  or  any  later  time.  "See  what  we  Christians 
know.  We  know  much  more  than  you  do ;  and  we  know 
about  better  things.  We  have  the  anointing  of  the  Holy 
One  and  we  know  all  things." 

VIII.     The  Epistle  of  the  Incarnation 

The  burden  of  this  epistle  is  the  reality  of  the  incarna- 
tion. John  is  concerned  that  all  Christians  shall  believe 
and  know  that  Jesus  was  a  brother  man.  To  lose  the 
certainty  of  the  humanity  of  Jesus  would  be  to  lose  the 
sweetest  sympathy  and  the  most  sufficient  comfort  of  the 
Christian  life.  It  would  be  the  loss  of  the  strongest  motive 
to  holy  living.  It  would  rob  the  example  of  Christ  of  all 
reality  and  all  inspiration.  Only  he  who  has  a  real  faith 
in  the  real  humanity  of  Jesus  will  feel  the  obligation  upon 
him  to  walk  even  as  he  walked.^^  John  says  that  the 
greatest  lie  of  the  ages  will  be  the  denial  of  the  reality  of 
the  incarnation.^^  John  says  that  the  very  climax  of  all 
antagonism  to  the  truth  will  be  manifest  in  the  antichrist 
who  will  promulgate  this  doctrine. 

The  spirit  of  the  antichrist  will  be  that  spirit  which  is 
bent  upon  annulling  Jesus. ^'^  The  Vulgate  in  this  pas- 
sage reads,  "separates  Jesus,"  and  we  understand  that  to 
mean,  divides  his  single  personality  into  two  separate,  dis- 
tinct, and  incompatible  parts,  makes  him  a  double-minded, 
two-souled  being,  neither  God  nor  man,  but  God  and  man, 
instead  of  the  God-man.  Jesus  had  no  two  natures.  He 
was  one,  even  as  we  are  one.  He  lived  on  our  plane.  The 
incarnation  was  genuine.    He  did  not  pretend  to  ignorance 


'8  I  John  2.  6. 

'"  I  John  2.  22. 

6"  I  John  4.  3,  R.  v.,  margin. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  185 

when  he  was  omniscient  in  reality.  He  did  not  profess 
inability  to  do  anything  of  himself  when  he  was  omnipotent 
in  reality.  It  was  no  sham  humanity  he  put  on.  There 
was  no  Omnipotent  One  masquerading  behind  the  human 
weakness  presented  in  the  Gospels.  There  was  no  Omnis- 
cient One  concealing  himself  behind  the  show  of  human 
surprise  and  wonder  and  ignorance  of  which  we  read  in 
the  Gospels.  There  was  no  Omnipresent  One  behind,  back 
of,  beyond,  different  from,  separate  from  Jesus.  The 
incarnation  was  not  Docetic,  but  actual.  The  incarnation 
was  not  seeming,  but  real.  The  Divine  really  became 
human,  not  partly  so,  but  wholly  so,  in  Jesus.  There  was 
not  Divinity  and  humanity  in  him ;  but  Divinity  in  hu- 
manity, one  and  inseparable  in  thought  and  in  fact.  The 
Word  became  flesh ;  God  became  man ;  and  thereafter  he 
was  not  God  and  man  in  any  contrasting  or  distinguishable 
or  separable  sense,  not  ttvo  entities,  two  personalities,  two 
beings,  but  one,  the  God-Man  for  evermore.  It  is  to  this 
reality  of  the  incarnation  that  John  clings  as  the  supreme 
article  of  his   faith. 

He  knew  the  facts,  and  it  was  not  possible  for  him  to 
doubt  it.  He  had  seen  and  heard  and  handled  the  manifest 
proofs.  He  knew  that  those  who  denied  these  proofs  were 
liars  and  antichrists.  Could  he  ever  forget  that  day  when 
Jesus  had  first  said  to  him,  "Come  and  see"  ?  Could  he 
ever  forget  any  of  the  incidents  of  that  marvelous  day? 
Did  he  not  remember  many  other  days  only  less  wonderful 
than  that  because  his  eyes  were  becoming  accustomed 
to  this  revelation  of  truth  and  of  grace?  He  had  lived  with 
Jesus.  They  had  journeyed  together  and  worked  together. 
They  had  reclined  at  the  same  table ;  they  had  dipped  in  the 
same  dish.  They  had  been  weary  and  hungry  together. 
Jesus  had  been  his  companion,  brother,  teacher,  friend.  He 
had  had  daily  and  indisputable  proofs  of  the  Lord's  true 
and  real  hurnanity.  It  was  a  plain  and  unquestionable  fact 
to  him.    The  denial  of  that  fact  was  equivalent  to  a  denial 


i86  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

of  the  whole  gospel;  for  the  whole  gospel  depended  on 
this  fundamental  truth. 

If  the  incarnation  was  not  a  reality,  if  the  Divine  Messias 
was  to  be  distinguished  from  the  man  Jesus,  then  the  whole 
faith  was  hung  on  a  phantom,  the  cross  was  a  sham,  the 
death  was  a  delusion,  the  resurrection  was  an  hallucination, 
and  the  ascension  was  the  climax  in  a  long  series  of  a  Divine 
Comedy  of  Errors;  and  the  Christians  were  the  worst 
dupes  in  all  history  and  the  most  miserable  of  men  on  the 
earth.  To  assert  this  was  to  annul  the  Christian  faith. 
Therefore  the  last  message  of  the  aged  apostle  to  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  the  final  word  of  the  Book  of  Divine  Revela- 
tion to  men,  was  this :  "The  most  important  dogma  of  your 
faith  is  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh.  The  most 
damnable  heresy  ever  devised  among  men  is  the  denial  of 
the  reality  of  the  incarnation.  Every  spirit  that  confesseth 
that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the  flesh  is  of  God :  and  every 
spirit  that  confesseth  not  Jesus  is  not  of  God:  and  this  is 
the  spirit  of  the  antichrist  whereof  ye  have  heard  that  it 
cometh;  and  now  it  is  in  the  world  already."^^ 

IX.     The  Epistle  of  the  Atonement 

The  Epistle  of  the  Incarnation  would  naturally  be  the 
Epistle  of  the  Atonement.  Bishop  Warren  has  said  of  the 
First  Epistle  of  John:  "No  book  of  the  New  Testament 
is  so  pervaded  and  saturated  with  the  idea  of  the  atonement 
by  blood.  The  book  contains  but  five  short  chapters.  In 
each  of  the  first  two  and  last  two  is  a  distinct  statement 
or  definition  of  the  atoning  work,  while  the  middle  chapter 
has  three.  Hence  there  are  seven  clear  testimonies,  inde- 
pendent and  emphatic ;  a  larger  number  than  can  be  found 
anywhere  else  in  the  same  space.  .  .  .^^  There  is  no  refin- 
ing of  the  language  of  the  Jewish  sacrifices.  ...  No  inti- 


61 1  John  4.  2,  3. 

«2  Iliff  School  Studies,  p.  78. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  187 

mation  is  allowed  that  Christ's  death  was  an  instructive 
spectacle,  a  most  influential  example,  a  power  of  emotional 
effect  on  the  beholder.  But  it  was  a  real  substitution  of 
the  death  of  Christ  for  the  eternal  death  of  man."^""^ 

In  some  quarters  a  "bloody  salvation"  is  as  much  decried 
as  is  "the  bloody  shirt"  in  other  quarters  in  politics.  Yet 
these  old  war  veterans  who  go  around  with  one  leg  and  a 
crutch,  or  with  an  empty  sleeve,  or  with  shattered  constitu- 
tion and  health,  still  talk  and  will  talk  about  the  bloody 
sacrifices  of  the  Civil  War  and  they  still  think  that  its 
bloodshed  and  sacrifice  was  the  salvation  of  the  nation.  It 
is  even  so  with  the  veterans  of  the  cross  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Their  salvation  is  a  salvation  obtained  by  suffering 
and  blood.  They  are  redeemed  by  the  blood,  cleansed  by 
the  blood,  saved  by  the  blood.  They  have  no  other  gospel 
to  preach. 

Let  us  recall  their  testimony.  Paul  declares,  God  hath 
set  Christ  forth  "to  he  a  propitiation  ...  in  his  blood. "^* 
We  have  been  "justified  by  his  blood. "^^  "We  have  our 
redemption  through  his  blood."^^  "Ye  .  .  .  are  made  nigh 
in  the  blood  of  Christ. "^'^  He  hath  "made  peace  through 
the  blood  of  his  cross."^^  God  purchased  the  church  "with 
his  own  blood."^^  Peter  agrees,  "Ye  .  .  .  were  redeemed 
with  precious  blood  .  .  .  even  the  blood  of  Christ."'^*'  We 
are  elect  "unto  obedience  and  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ. "^^ 

John,  the  beloved  disciple,  the  veteran  apostle,  last  of  the 
great  leaders  to  write  his  testimony  concerning  these  things, 
tells  us  that  Jesus  loved  us  and  loosed  us  from  our  sins  in 
his  own  blood,''^^  ^nd  in  heaven  they  sing  about  it,  "Worthy 
art   thou:  .  .  .  for   thou   wast   slain,   and   didst   purchase 


M  op.  cit.,  p.  75.  ^  Col.  I.  20. 

**  Rom.  3.  25.  *'  Acts  20.  28. 

»« Rom.  5.  9.  ™  I  Pet.  I.  18,  19. 

«  Eph.  I.  7.  ^'  I  Pet.  I.  2. 

"Eph.  2.  13.  "Rev.  I.  3. 


i88  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

[men]  unto  God  with  thy  blood."''^  The  saints  there  have 
washed  their  robes  and  made  them  white  in  the  blood  of 
the  LambJ*  They  overcame  the  adversary  because  of  the 
blood  of  the  LambJ^  In  the  First  Epistle  John  has  written 
the  final  subscription  to  the  faith  of  the  New  Testament 
church,  "The  blood  of  Jesus  his  Son  cleanseth  us  from  all 
sin."^^  It  is  the  final  protest  of  Scripture  against  that 
over-re'finement  which  shirks  the  facts. 

It  may  be  too  that  there  were  those  in  John's  day  who 
were  denying  the  universal  efficacy  of  the  atonement  made 
by  Jesus.  They  may  have  been  claiming  it  for  themselves 
alone,  or  limiting  it  to  some  circle  of  the  elect.  Anyway, 
John  takes  occasion  in  this  epistle  to  state  as  clearly  as  it 
could  be  stated,  "He  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins;  and 
not  for  ours  only,  but  also  for  the  whole  world.'"^^ 

X.    The  Epistle  of  Personal  Experience 

This  is  the  Epistle  of  Personal  Experience.  Hilgenfeld 
says  of  it,  "The  fresh,  vivid,  attractive  character  of  the 
epistle  consists  exactly  in  this,  that  it  conducts  us  with  such 
a  predilection  into  the  inner  experience  of  genuine  Chris- 
tian life.'"^*  That  is  the  glory  which  rests  upon  these  pages. 
They  speak  of  the  knowledge,  the  privilege,  the  possession, 
the  experience,  the  anointing,  the  light,  the  love,  the  life 
which  have  been  made  possible  to  every  Christian. 

It  surely  is  noteworthy  that  in  this  last  literary  legacy 
from  the  apostolic  church,  the  last  picture  drawn  by  an 
apostle  of  the  possibilities  and  the  realities  in  the  Christian 
brotherhood,  there  is  no  mention  of  miracles  or  visions  or 
tongues  or  any  other  extraordinary  supernatural  phenom- 
ena. These  are  all  dropped  out  of  view,  and  only  those 
things   remain  which  are  the   continuous  heritage  of  he- 


"  Rev.  5.  9.  ''*  I  John  i.  7. 

''*  Rev.  7.  14.  "  I  John  2.  2. 

^6  Jiev.  12.  U.  ''^  Quoted  in  Meyer,  p.  451. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  189 

lievers — fellowship  with  the  Father,  the  inspiration  of  the 
Spirit,  pardon,  peace,  and  purity  in  the  practice  of  prayer 
and  progress  in  a  life  of  love.  These  are  the  topics  of 
supreme  importance  in  the  Christian  life.  They  may  be 
few  in  number,  but  they  outweigh  all  others  in  their  value 
to  personal  Christian  experience.  The  spiritual  perception 
of  this  epistle  is  born  of  the  insight  of  a  saint  and  seer. 
John  lives  in  the  heights.  He  has  continuous  fellowship 
with  great  thoughts  and  abiding  enjoyment  of  profound 
experiences,  and  he  covets  the  company  of  all  Christians  in 
these  things. 

XI.     The  Epistle  of  Fellowship 

This  is  the  Epistle  of  Fellowship.  It  is  the  aim  of  the 
epistle  that  its  readers  may  have  such  fellowship  as  John 
himself  enjoyed.  "That  which  we  have  seen  and  heard 
declare  we  unto  you  also,  that  ye  may  have  fellowship  with 
us."'^^  Westcott  thinks  that  this  is  the  main  thought  of 
the  epistle.^^  It  seems  to  run  through  the  whole  course 
of  the  discussion.  The  epistle  begins  with  the  statement, 
"Our  fellowship  is  with  the  Father  and  with  his  Son  Jesus 
Christ."^^  It  goes  on  to  detail  the  conditions  upon  which 
this  fellowship  may  be  maintained,  in  conformity  to  the 
divine  will,  in  communion  with  the  Divine  Spirit,  in  conse- 
cration to  the  divine  ideals  of  light  and  love.  It  closes  with 
the  statement,  "We  are  in  him  that  is  true,  even  in  his 
Son  Jesus  Christ. "^^  Surely,  no  man  ever  was  better  quali- 
fied to  speak  upon  this  subject  of  fellowship  between  God 
and  man  than  was  the  apostle  John.  He  had  reclined  upon 
the  bosom  of  Jesus.  He  had  been  admitted  into  the  closest 
intimacy  with  the  Incarnate  Lord.  For  two  generations 
since  the  ascension  of  Jesus  he  had  proven  the  possibility 
of  continuous  life  in  the  Presence  Divine.    He  knew  what 


"  I  John  I.  3.  "  I  John  i.  3. 

8°  Commentary,  p.  xlvii.  *^  i  John  5.  20. 


iQO  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

he  was  talking  about.  He  desired  that  the  whole  church 
might  know  this  fellowship,  in  order  that  its  joy  might  be 
full  as  his  own. 

The  two  conditions  for  the  maintenance  of  this  unbroken 
relationship,  John  says,  are  absolute  righteousness  and  un- 
failing love.s^  Righteousness  and  love  are  the  marks  of 
the  children  of  God.  Wickedness  and  hate  are  the  marks 
of  the  children  of  the  devil.  Here  is  the  spirit  of  a 
Boanerges  in  theology.  "Little  children,  let  no  man  lead 
you  astray:  he  that  doeth  righteousness  is  righteous,  even 
as  he  is  righteous :  he  that  doeth  sin  is  of  the  devil ;  for 
the  devil  sinneth  from  the  beginning.  ...  In  this  the  chil- 
dren of  God  are  manifest,  and  the  children  of  the  devil : 
whosoever  doeth  not  righteousness  is  not  of  God,  neither 
he  that  loveth  not  his  brother."^* 

Let  the  church  understand  this,  then,  for  all  time  to 
come.  Fellowship  with  the  Father  is  to  be  maintained  not 
by  subscription  to  any  creed  or  union  with  any  organiza- 
tion. Fellowship  with  the  Father  is  to  be  maintained  only 
by  righteousness,  out  and  out  rightness;  straightforward, 
steadfast,  unswerving  adherence  to  principle;  downright, 
outright  uprightness  of  character;  through  and  through, 
thorough  and  true  honesty  of  purpose ;  purity  of  intention, 
integrity  of  action  everywhere.  The  man  who  maintains 
fellowship  with  God  must  be  righteous  in  business,  right- 
eous in  public,  righteous  in  private,  righteous  from  sunrise 
to  sunset,  right  with  God  and  right  with  man  while  he 
wakes  and  while  he  sleeps.  A  son  of  God  moves  in  as 
steady  an  orbit  as  the  sun  in  heaven.  The  child  of  God 
is  true  to  his  heart's  core,  sound  from  center  to  circum- 
ference. His  conscience  is  as  steady  as  the  needle  to  the 
pole.  He  loves  the  right  in  his  heart.  He  plans  for  the 
right  with  his  head.  He  does  the  right  with  his  hands. 
He  will  stand  for  the  right,  if  the  heavens  totter  and  the 

^  I  John  3.  7-10. 
8*  I  John  3.  7,  8,  10. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  191 

earth  reels.  He  cannot  be  bought  with  any  bauble.  He  is 
not  for  sale  at  any  price.  He  neither  brags  nor  runs  away. 
He  tells  the  truth  and  looks  the  world  and  the  devil  right 
in  the  eye. 

Righteousness  is  his  characteristic,  righteousness  of  out- 
ward conduct  and  righteousness  of  inward  life.  There 
is  no  chance  here  for  crookedness,  no  loophole  for  hypo- 
crites to  hide  in,  no  opportunity  for  double  dealing  of  any 
kind.  Righteousness  always  moves  along  right  lines,  and 
always  at  right  angles  to  anything  and  everything  wrong. 
The  rising  tide  of  Socialism  in  all  the  lands  to-day  urges 
the  social  necessity  of  this  primary  demand  of  the  apostle 
John  for  the  Christian  life.  The  Socialists  say:  "It  is 
simple  justice  we  demand.  We  will  be  satisfied  with  our 
rights."  Their  indictment  against  the  Christian  Church  is 
that  righteousness  has  not  characterized  its  treatment  of 
the  working  classes. 

However,  when  the  social  Utopia  has  been  realized  and 
every  man  has  his  just  rights,  John's  standard  for  the 
Christian  life  will  be  still  far  in  advance  of  that  condition. 
John  says  that  social  righteousness  must  be  the  product  of 
Christian  love.  To  maintain  fellowship  with  God  the 
Christian  must  be  kindly  aflfectioned  to  all  men  with 
brotherly  love.  He  must  realize  the  fact  that  if  God  is 
his  Father,  all  men  are  his  brothers.  No  matter  how  much 
some  men  may  differ  with  him  in  their  tastes  or  their  habits 
of  life,  there  is  some  point  of  sympathy  between  them 
which  proves  affinity.  There  is  a  relationship  between  the 
most  abject  savage  and  the  most  cultured  scholar.  There 
are  so  many  chords  in  this  golden  harp  of  a  thousand 
strings  which  forms  our  earthly  life  that  some  one  can 
be  found  to  vibrate  in  unison  with  those  in  any  other.  A 
touch  of  nature  makes  the  whole  world  kin. 

Where  is  that  Pharisee  who  draws  his  robes  of  righteous- 
ness about  him  or  lifts  from  your  path  the  royal  purple 
wealth  affords  or  shrouds  his  face  behind  a  veil  of  intel- 


192  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

lectual  superiority  and  gives  thanks  that  he  is  not  as  other 
men?  To  him  let  the  He  be  given.  The  vilest  sinner,  the 
poorest  w^retch,  the  most  illiterate  creature  on  God's  earth 
is  a  man,  is  his  brother,  has  a  soul,  and  will  appear  before 
God.  His  destiny  may  depend  upon  the  degree  in  which 
we  love  him.  Our  destiny  surely  depends  upon  the  degree 
in  which  we  love  him.  Our  eternal  interests  are  one.  Our 
fortunes  for  eternity  are  indissolubly  linked.  To  the  child 
of  God  all  men  are  his  brothers,  and  he  is  not  only  righteous 
but  loving.  "In  this  the  children  of  God  are  manifest,  and 
the  children  of  the  devil :  whosoever  doeth  not  righteous- 
ness is  not  of  God,  neither  he  that  loveth  not  his  brother."^^ 
It  is  a  high  standard,  this  standard  of  fellowship  with  the 
Father  of  all.  It  is  as  much  higher  than  the  standard 
demanded  by  our  social  reformers  as  the  Christian  millen- 
nium will  be  higher  and  better  than  the  best  of  the  Utopias 
planned  by  them.  It  is  a  high  standard.  Is  it  too  high 
to  be  within  the  reach  of  men  on  the  earth?  It  surely 
would  be  unless  men  can  be  saved  entirely  from  selfishness 
and  from  sin.  Is  that  an  utter  impossibility?  John  did 
not  think  so,  as  this  epistle  clearly  shows. 

XII.    The  Epistle  of  Purity 

This  is  the  epistle  which  promises  cleansing  from  sin  and 
perfecting  in  love,  the  epistle  of  perfect  love  in  a  purified 
life.  Sin  and  selfishness  are  incompatible  with  fellowship 
with  the  Father.  Only  purity  and  love  can  fellowship 
with  him.  Did  John  say  that  he  wrote  this  epistle  in  order 
that  we  might  have  fellowship  with  the  Father?  He  says 
again,  "My  little  children,  these  things  write  I  unto  you 
that  ye  may  not  sin."*^^  The  two  objects  are  the  same.  He 
aims  at  sinlessness  in  order  that  there  may  be  fellowship. 
Nothing  could  be  clearer  than  that  John  puts  the  sinner 


85  I  John  3.  10. 
^  I  John  2.  I. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  193 

into  one  category  and  the  Christian  into  another.  Sin 
distinguishes  the  one  from  the  other.  The  man  who  sins 
is  a  sinner;  and  the  Christian  is  cleansed  from  sin  and 
kept  from  the  power  of  the  evil  one.  It  is  the  normal 
experience  in  the  Christian  life  to  have  constant  and  com- 
plete victory  over  sin.  John  aims  at  sinlessness  because 
sinlessness  alone  is  capable  of  sustained  fellowship  with  the 
Father  and  the  Son.  Purity  was  no  impossibility.  Perfect 
love  to  God  and  man  was  not  contrary  to  any  law  of  life. 
Sinlessness  was  no  abnormality  in  humanity.  It  is  the 
natural  and  inevitable  result  of  the  presence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  the  heart. 

John  is  indulging  in  no  visionary  flights  of  rhetoric,  but 
he  is  stating  the  simple  facts  of  his  own  experience  and 
the  experience  of  all  who  had  tested  the  grace  of  God  in 
their  lives.  Hear  how  he  puts  the  truth.  "If  we  walk  in 
the  light,  as  he  is  in  the  light,  we  have  fellowship  one  with 
another,  and  the  blood  of  Jesus  his  Son  cleanseth  us  from 
all  sin.  If  we  say  that  we  have  no  sin"  to  be  cleansed  from, 
"we  deceive  ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us."  No  man 
is  superior  to  the  need  of  God's  grace.  No  man  can  say 
truthfully  that  he  has  no  need  of  a  Saviour.  The  man 
who  thinks  that  is  self-deceived  and  never  has  realized  the 
facts  of  the  case.  Let  him  search  his  own  heart.  Let  him 
see  if  there  is  no  unrighteousness  there  and  no  selfishness 
that  needs  to  be  forgiven  and  taken  away.  Then  when 
he  has  realized  his  true  condition,  let  him  hear  the  gracious 
truth,  "If  we  confess  our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and  righteous 
to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  unright- 
eousness. If  we  say  that  we  have  not  sinned,"  and  there- 
fore have  no  need  of  forgiveness  and  cleansing,  "we  make 
him  a  liar,  and  his  word  is  not  in  us."  It  is  only  upon 
sinners  that  these  gracious  gifts  are  bestowed.  The  be- 
stowal of  these  gifts  makes  the  sinner  a  child  of  God. 
Henceforth  he  is  to  be  saved  from  sin. 

All  sin  is  Satanic.    The  child  of  God  is  no  longer  a  child 


194  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

of  the  devil.  "My  little  children,  these  things  write  I  unto 
you  that  ye  may  not  sin"  at  all.  You  may  not  indulge  in 
sin  even  once.  The  aorist  tense  denotes  a  single  act  as 
distinguished  from  the  abiding  state.  You  are  no  longer 
to  abide  in  sin ;  that  goes  without  saying.  You  are  not 
to  sin  in  any  single  act ;  but  if  any  man  be  overtaken  in  a 
fault,  be  swept  off  his  feet  for  an  instant,  sin  in  some  single 
act  which  is  clearly  opposed  to  the  general  current  and 
tenor  of  his  life,  we  have  an  Advocate  with  the  Father. 
Confess  to  him,  and  the  life  will  be  restored  to  the  state  of 
likeness  to  the  Holy  One.^'*'  "Whoso  keepeth  his  word,  in 
him  verily  hath  the  love  of  God  been  perfected."^^  "Every 
one  that  hath  this  hope  set  on  him  purifieth  himself,  even 
as  he  is  pure."^^  "Whosoever  abideth  in  him  sinneth 
not."^<^  "Whosoever  is  begotten  of  God  doeth  no  sin,  be- 
cause his  seed  abideth  in  him:  and  he  cannot  sin,  because 
he  is  begotten  of  God."^^ 

It  is  no  physical  impossibility  which  is  here  posited.  It 
is  the  moral  impossibility,  the  impossibility  a  clean  man 
feels  of  his  plunging  into  a  bed  of  mire  for  no  other  reason 
than  that  he  loves  filth.  He  says :  "Let  the  swine  seek  their 
enjoyment  in  such  a  place,  and  let  them  wallow  there  to 
their  heart's  content.  It  is  impossible  for  you  or  for  me 
to  think  that  I  could  enjoy  it.  I  cannot  do  such  a  thing." 
He  can,  as  far  as  the  physical  possibility  is  concerned.  He 
cannot  and  remain  a  clean  man.  The  Christian  has  no 
desire  to  be  dirty.  His  desire  is  to  be  clean.  With  that 
desire  he  cannot  do  anything  which  would  blacken  his  soul 
or  even  his  finger  tips  with  the  devil's  dirt. 

Joseph  in  Potiphar's  house  was  tempted  to  adultery,  and 
he  said  to  the  temptress,  "How  then  can  I  do  this  great 
wickedness,  and  sin  against  God?"^^  He  could  have  done 
it,  if  he  had  so  desired.     There  was  no  restraining  hand. 

"  I  John  I.  7  to  2.  I.  •"  I  John  3.  6. 

88  I  John  2.  5.  "  I  John  3.  9. 

89 1  John  3.  3.  ^  Gen.  39.  9. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  195 

Possibly  he  might  have  escaped  detection.  There  was  no 
seeming  prospect  of  danger  to  himself  in  any  such  indul- 
gence. Yet  how  could  he  do  it  and  remain  an  honest  man? 
How  could  he  do  it  and  retain  his  self-respect?  How  could 
he  do  it  and  continue  to  enjoy  the  favor  of  God?  He  could 
go  to  prison  for  years.  He  could  suffer  for  righteousness' 
sake.  He  could  not  do  that  which  would  forfeit  his  fel- 
lowship with  the  Father.  He  could  not  do  that  which 
would  make  him  a  child  of  the  devil  and  no  longer  a  child 
of  God. 

In  the  regeneration  of  the  Christian  the  Spirit  was  put 
within  him  as  the  germ  of  a  new  life.  He  brings  forth  the 
fruit  of  the  Spirit  in  all  his  doings.  That  is  all  he  can  do, 
as  long  as  that  is  the  only  seed  he  cherishes  in  his  heart. 
That  is  John's  figure.  He  is  an  honest  man.  Is  an  oppor- 
tunity given  him  to  rob  somebody  and  never  be  discovered? 
He  says :  "I  cannot.  It  is  impossible  for  me  to  think  of 
such  a  thing.  It  is  no  physical  impossibility.  I  see  that. 
Yet  it  is  impossible  for  me  to  wrong  my  brother  and  main- 
tain my  Christian  life.  I  would  rather  do  that  than  have 
any  sum  of  money." 

He  is  a  total  abstainer.  Somebody  offers  him  a  glass 
of  intoxicating  drink  and  asks  him  to  enjoy  it.  He  says: 
"I  cannot.  I  have  signed  the  pledge.  I  cannot  do  it  with- 
out breaking  my  pledge.  I  cannot  do  it  and  maintain  my 
integrity.  I  would  rather  do  that  than  have  the  promised 
pleasure  of  getting  drunk."  .  Whosoever  is  begotten  of 
God  doeth  the  will  of  God  and  finds  in  that  his  highest 
pleasure;  because  the  seed  of  the  Spirit  abideth  in  him 
and  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit  is  love,  joy,  and  peace.  He  can- 
not sin,  because  he  is  begotten  of  God  and  as  a  child  of 
God  he  is  not  willing  to  risk  his  Christian  heritage  for  any 
single  pottage  mess  of  the  devil. 

The  white  robes  of  the  book  of  Revelation  are  the  right- 
eousness of  the  saints,  achieved  and  manifested  here  upon 
the   earth,    recognized   and   guaranteed    forever   there   in 


196  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

heaven.  John  says  that  those  robes  are  to  be  spotlessly 
clean,  fine  and  white  and  pure  as  the  driven  snow ;  for 
there  will  be  no  print  of  the  devil's  dirty  fingers  on  any  fold 
of  them.  The  Christian  man  keepeth  himself  and  the  evil 
one  touches  him  not.  It  is  as  clear  as  the  sunlight  that 
John's  standard  for  the  Christian  life,  as  set  forth  in  this 
epistle,  is  that  of  absolute  righteousness  and  perfect  love, 
perfect  obedience  in  perfect  purity.  He  represents  this  as 
possible  and  normal  for  every  Christian.  This  is  the  last 
message  from  God  to  man  in  the  Holy  Book,  as  to  the 
Christian  vocation  and  what  it  involves.  Such  a  standard 
would  cast  us  into  despair  if  we  had  not  along  with  it 
the  assurance  of  sufficient  divine  help  and  the  promise  of 
present  and  eternal  victory. 

XIII.    The  Epistle  of  Victory 

This  is  the  Epistle  of  Assured  Victory.  John  lived  the 
overcoming  life,  and  he  believed  that  every  Christian  might 
live  it  as  well  as  he.  The  devil  was  a  defeated  foe.  He 
dared  not  come  near  enough  to  the  Christian  to  touch  him. 
Even  in  the  throng  he  did  not  venture  to  reach  forth  his 
hand  and  touch  the  hem  of  his  garment.  God  was  greater 
than  the  devil  and  all  his  imps ;  and  John  wrote,  "Ye  are 
of  God,  my  little  children,  and  have  overcome  them :  be- 
cause greater  is  he  that  is  in  you  than  he  that  is  in  the 
world."^^  As  surely  as  God  was  greater  than  the  devil, 
the  Christian  might  live  secure.  As  surely  as  Jesus  had 
come  to  defeat  the  devil,  the  Christian  might  enter  into 
all  the  fruits  of  his  conquest  and  enjoy  continuous  victory 
for  himself  and  claim  it  for  the  rest  of  men.  "To  this  end 
was  the  Son  of  God  manifested,  that  he  might  destroy  the 
works  of  the  devil."^'* 

There  is  a  school  of  religious  thinkers  in  the  present 


*3  I  John  4.  4. 
«  I  John  3.  8. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  197 

day  who  are  not  content  with  the  verb  in  that  sentence  as 
John  wrote  it.  They  think  that  Jesus  will  be  manifested  to 
destroy  the  works  of  the  devil.  They  postpone  the  ameho- 
ration  of  all  of  this  world's  ills  until  the  second  coming  of 
the  Lord.  They  believe  that  this  world  lieth  in  the  evil 
one,  and  that  there  is  no  hope  of  its  recovery.  They  think 
things  are  getting  worse  and  worse  all  the  time  and  they 
have  no  call  to  set  them  right.  They  believe  in  evangelism 
because  individuals  may  be  saved  from  the  general  wreck 
and  made  ready  for  the  second  coming  of  the  Lord.  They 
believe  in  foreign  missionary  work  because  the  sooner  the 
heathen  nations  are  evangelized  the  more  reason  we  may 
have  to  expect  the  speedy  second  coming  of  the  Lord. 

However,  they  are  thoroughgoing  pessimists  as  to  the 
power  set  loose  upon  this  world  in  the  first  coming  of  our 
Lord.  They  expect  the  devil  to  win  in  the  first  round  of 
the  battle.  They  search  the  newspapers  for  the  signs  of 
the  times,  and  they  find  them  in  every  evidence  of  corrup- 
tion and  the  approaching  dissolution  of  the  present  status 
of  things.  While  the  rest  of  us  look  hopefully  to  the  com- 
ing days,  they  prophesy  woe  upon  woe  unto  the  very  end. 
While  the  rest  of  us  see  in  the  slow  evolution  of  the  ages 
the  steady  uplifting  of  the  race,  the  survival  of  the  fittest 
in  physical  and  moral  life,  they  find  nothing  but  the  evi- 
dences of  continuous  degeneration  and  the  fulfillment  of  the 
devil's  great  expectations  at  every  point.  While  all  classes 
are  being  roused  to  new  effort  for  social  betterment  and 
community  good,  they  have  a  feeling  that  this  is  flying  in 
the  face  of  Providence;  and  that  seriously  to  endeavor  to 
construct  an  earthly  paradise  would  be  to  falsify  Scripture 
and  defeat  the  revealed  program  of  God. 

We  believe  that  they  are  unscriptural  themselves.  We 
believe  that  Jesus  was  manifested  to  destroy  the  works  of 
the  devil,  and  that  the  power  sufficient  to  destroy  all  the 
devil's  works  on  earth  is  even  now  at  our  command.  We 
believe  that  the  regeneration  of  any  individual  is  positive 


198  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

proof  that  all  individuals  may  be  regenerated  even  as  they 
all  are  now  redeemed.  We  believe  that  foreign  missionary 
work,  to  be  scriptural  and  apostolic  and  Christlike,  must 
aim  not  only  at  the  evangelization  but  also  at  the  thorough- 
going Christianization  of  all  the  peoples  in  all  the  lands. 
We  believe  that  all  effort  to  make  men  better  and  to  im- 
prove their  physical  and  mental  and  moral  and  spiritual 
condition  is  in  accordance  with  the  revealed  will  of  God. 
We  believe  in  helping  men,  individually  and  collectively; 
and  we  believe  that  with  the  help  of  God  all  men  may  be 
helped  as  all  men  have  been  helped  in  all  the  ages  past. 
We  believe  that  the  world  is  growing  better  all  the  time. 
We  believe  that  there  are  many  things  which  ought  to  be 
better  than  they  are  at  present  and  we  believe  that  we  are 
put  into  this  world  to  better  them.  We  believe  that  it  is 
the  task  and  the  glorious  privilege  of  the  Christian  Church 
to  usher  in  the  kingdom  of  God  everywhere,  until  the  will 
of  our  God  is  done  upon  earth  as  it  is  done  in  heaven.  We 
labor  to  that  end,  in  confident  faith  that  all  the  victories  of 
the  past  are  only  the  beginnings  of  yet  greater  victories  to 
come.  Greater  is  he  that  is  with  us  than  any  power  which 
may  be  brought  against  us,  and  therefore  we  may  rest  in 
the  assurance  of  victory. 

That  is  the  spirit  of  the  apostle  John  in  his  old  age  here 
in  Ephesus.  He  knows  that  the  devil  is  active,  and  there 
are  many  antichrists,  and  there  are  some  deserters,  and  the 
world  seems  hostile,  but  he  is  not  alarmed.  He  is  as  calm 
as  if  there  were  no  conflict  on  hand.  He  is  so  sure  that 
it  will  end  in  triumph  for  his  Lord  that  it  never  occurs  to 
him  to  be  nervous  about  it.  It  is  this  atmosphere  of  perfect 
assurance  and  peace  which  seems  to  have  impressed  Haupt 
most  in  this  First  Epistle.  He  mentions  it  again  and  again. 
He  says,  "As  when,  in  a  firmly  built  house,  the  master, 
hearing  the  storm  without,  gives  one  more  glance  around 
to  see  that  all  is  secure,  while  still  he  knows  that  he  is  shel- 
tered and  safe,  and,  indeed,  the  more  furiously  the  tempest 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  199 

blows,  feels  all  the  more  sense  of  security,  so  it  is  with 
this  epistle,  which  gives  us  the  feeling  of  an  inexpressibly 
beautiful  peace  and  silent  confidence  of  joy  diffused  through 
it  from  beginning  to  end."®^  Again  he  writes :  "Here  comes 
in  that  character  of  the  epistle  which  has  been  indicated 
above:  its  rest  and  its  peace,  as  if  adjusted  to  the  most 
joyful  relations;  its  internal  release  from  all  the  agitation 
of  the  world,  as  if  its  author  were  looking  out  from  a 
secure  haven  into  the  tumult  of  the  distant  sea."^*^ 

The  haven  in  which  John  rests  is  the  haven  of  faith  in 
the  unfailing  and  unequaled  power  of  his  Lord.  He  de- 
pends upon  it  with  absolute  trust  in  its  triumph  in  the  end. 
If  Jesus  -was  manifested  to  destroy  the  works  of  the  devil, 
then  the  works  of  the  devil  will  be  destroyed.  The  devil 
may  rage,  but  his  doom  is  declared.  He  has  reason  to  be 
nervous,  but  the  Christian  goes  ahead  in  calm  confidence 
that  the  will  of  his  God  will  be  accomplished  in  due  time. 
The'  assurance  of  victory  gives  him  perfect  peace  all  the 
time.  That  is  the  faith  in  which  this  final  New  Testament 
epistle  is  written.  It  is  an  Epistle  of  Victory  from  begin- 
ning to  end. 

We  are  glad  that  our  New  Testament  closes  with  a  bugle 
blast  of  defiance  to  the  world,  the  flesh,  and  the  devil.  We 
are  glad  that  the  last  book  written  is  a  trumpet  note  of 
triumph  for  all  time.  Its  first  chapter  pictures  the  victory 
over  sin.  Its  second  chapter  proclaims  the  victory  over 
the  evil  one.  Its  third  chapter  announces  the  victory  of 
righteousness.  Its  fourth  chapter  declares  the  victory  of 
love.  The  fifth  chapter  peals  forth  the  victory  of  faith. 
Hear  how  John  repeats  his  confidence  in  individual  and 
universal  spiritual  victory.  "I  write  unto  you,  young  men, 
because  ye  have  overcome  the  evil  one."^'^  And  immedi- 
ately again,  "I  have  written  unto  you,  young  men,  because 

*^  Haupt,  Commentary  on  the  First  Epistle  of  John,  p.  362. 

«6  P.  364. 

»'  I  John  2.  13. 


200  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

ye  are  strong,  and  the  word  of  God  abideth  in  you,  and  ye 
have  overcome  the  evil  one."^^  Again  he  strikes  the  note  of 
triumph  for  all  his  children  in  the  faith,  "Ye  are  of  God, 
my  little  children,  and  have  overcome  them :  because  greater 
is  he  that  is  in  you  than  he  that  is  in  the  world."^^  Finally 
his  voice  rings  out  over  the  whole  Church  of  Christ  for  all 
time  to  come,  "Whatsoever  is  begotten  of  God  overcometh 
the  world,  and  this  is  the  victory  that  hath  overcome  the 
world,  even  our  faith."^*^*'  The  world  has  been  overcome. 
The  victory  has  been  won.  Faith  claims  it  and  claims  it 
now. 

Jesus  was  manifested  to  destroy  the  works  of  the  devil. 
The  devil  called  himself  the  prince  of  this  world.  He 
had  his  stronghold  in  the  hearts  of  men.  As  the  stronger 
man  our  Lord  entered  into  the  palace  of  the  strong  and 
took  possession  of  all  its  furnishings.  Then  from  the 
cross-top  he  made  the  further  descent  into  the  depths  of 
hell  and  the  grave;  and  he  came  back  with  the  shout  of 
victory,  bearing  the  keys  of  hell  in  his  hand,  to  live  for 
evermore  in  undisputed  triumph  and  rulership  over  all  his 
universe.  Now  it  is  true  that  whithersoever  we  go  Jesus 
will  be  with  us.  We  never  can  get  beyond  his  providence 
and  his  power.  We  never  need  be  without  his  sympathy 
and  his  aid.  We  can  sing  with  the  psalmist:  "If  I  ascend 
up  into  heaven,  thou  art  there:  if  I  make  my  bed  in  hell, 
behold,  thou  art  there.  If  I  take  the  wings  of  the  morning, 
and  dwell  in  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  sea;  even  there 
shall   thy  hand  lead  me,  and  thy  right  hand   shall   hold 


me. 


'101 


We  never  can  go  anywhere  as  the  children  of  God,  we 
never  can  be  anywhere  in  all  the  experiences  of  life  here 
or  hereafter,  as  long  as  we  trust  him,  where  he  cannot  give 
us  present  and  continuous  victory.  Yea,  though  he  should 
send  us  into  the  very  centers  of  the  enemy's  territory  and 

»8  I  John  2.  14.  !«>  I  John  5.  4. 

»» I  John  4.  4.  "1  Psa.  139.  8-10. 


THE  FIRST  EPISTLE  OF  JOHN  201 

power,  into  the  midst  of  the  hotbeds  of  vice,  into  the  haunts 
of  sin  and  iniquity,  into  what  may  seem  to  be  a  veritable 
hell  on  earth,  we  will  be  strong  and  of  a  good  courage. 
Yea,  though  he  should  give  us  to  be  tried  with  all  the  multi- 
plied devices  of  Satan  which  our  past  life  has  known  and 
which  in  the  future  may  be  increased  and  intensified,  we 
will  not  be  afraid,  neither  will  we  be  dismayed.  Yea, 
though  we  walk  through  the  valley  of  the  shadow  of  death, 
we  will  fear  no  evil.  For  the  Lord  our  God  will  be  with 
us ;  and  there  will  be  victory  with  him,  whithersoever  we  go. 

This  is  the  note  of  triumph  with  which  the  First  Epistle 
of  John  and  with  which  our  New  Testament  ends.  We 
have  overcome  the  evil  one  in  ourselves ;  and  this  is  the 
victory  that  hath  overcome  the  world,  even  our  faith. 
There  is  no  form  of  evil  we  need  fear  to  attack.  No 
matter  how  strongly  it  is  entrenched,  it  can  be  and  it  will 
be  overthrown.  There  is  no  principle  opposed  to  righteous- 
ness and  love  which  is  invincible.  However  long  it  may 
have  lasted,  it  is  facing  now  toward  the  day  of  its  final 
doom.  Jesus  was  manifested  to  destroy  all  the  works  of 
the  devil.  He  has  done  it  within  us  and  he  has  commis- 
sioned us  as  his  agents  to  carry  forward  the  conquest  to 
the  ends  of  the  earth.  Ye  are  of  God,  my  little  children, 
and  ye  have  overcome ;  because  greater  is  he  that  is  in  you 
than  he  that  is  in  the  world. 

"We  know  that  whosoever  is  begotten  of  God  sinneth 
not;  but  he  that  was  begotten  of  God  keepeth  himself,  and 
the  evil  one  toucheth  him  not."^*'^  There  is  our  Purity, 
undefiled  by  even  the  devil's  touch.  "We  know  that  we 
are  of  God,  and  the  whole  world  lieth  in  the  evil  one."^^^ 
There  is  our  Privilege,  a  privilege  which  we  must  share 
with  all  other  men  until  by  right  of  conquest  it  has  taken 
possession  of  all  the  earth.  "We  know  that  the  Son  of 
God  is  come,  and  hath  given  us  an  understanding,  that  we 

"«  I  John  5.  18. 
'"^  I  John  5.  19. 


202  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

know  him  that  is  true,  and  we  are  in  him  that  is  true,  even 
in  his  Son  Jesus  Christ."^*^^  There  is  the  Presence  who 
insures  our  triumph  for  evermore.  He  will  be  true.  We 
are  in  him  that  is  true.  The  only  question  is,  Will  we  be 
true  to  him?  John  does  not  doubt  that  the  church  will  be 
true,  but  he  closes  with  that  warning  and  exhortation,  "My 
little  children,  guard  yourselves  from  idols."^^^ 

That  is  the  last  word  of  the  aged  apostle.  That  is  the 
last  word  of  the  Holy  Book.  Let  no  one  think  that  because 
victory  is  assured  to  faith  he  may  fold  his  hands  and  take 
things  easy  in  the  Christian  life.  Faith  is  not  compatible 
with  laziness.  It  is  not  characteristic  of  easy-going  folk. 
It  belongs  to  robust  spirits.  It  is  an  exercise  of  the 
strongest  characters.  There  is  heroic  quality  in  it.  It  is  a 
soldier's  attribute.  One  must  keep  alive  and  alert.  One 
must  keep  awake  and  on  his  guard.  One  must  battle  like 
a  Boanerges.  The  battle  will  be  a  winning  one.  The  victory 
will  be  sure.  Only  there  must  be  no  negligence,  no  care- 
lessness, no  going  to  sleep  on  any  post  of  duty.  One  must 
be  on  guard  all  the  time.  There  in  Ephesus  the  whole 
atmosphere  was  filled  with  reverence  for  Artemis.  It  was 
not  easy  to  keep  clear  of  all  complications  with  the  prev- 
alent idolatry.  In  our  day  the  whole  atmosphere  is  filled 
with  the  idolatry  of  riches  and  power  and  position  and  suc- 
cess. It  is  not  easy  to  keep  clear  of  all  complications  with 
its  thousand  and  one  insidious  modes  of  attack.  The  child 
of  God  must  be  true  to  him  and  have  no  other  gods  before 
him.  He  cannot  serve  God  and  any  of  the  idols.  He  must 
cling  to  him  and  despise  the  others.  The  love  of  God  must 
be  supreme  in  his  heart  always.  "My  little  children,  keep 
yourselves  from  idols ;  and  God  will  give  you  the  Privilege 
of  His  Presence  and  His  Purity  and  His  Victory  for  ever- 
more."   That  is  John's  last  written  message  to  men. 

10*  I  John  5.  20. 
^^  I  John  5.  21. 


PART  IV 
THE  MINOR  EPISTLES  OF  JOHN 


PART  IV 
THE  MINOR  EPISTLES  OF  JOHN 

I.     General  Character 

1.  The  Second  and  Third  Epistles  of  John  are  specimens 
of  the  less  important  religious  correspondence  of  the  apos- 
tolic age.  The  Muratorian  Fragment  says  of  Paul's  letters 
to  Timothy  and  Philemon,  "They  are  written  out  of  private 
affection,  and  yet  to  the  honor  of  the  catholic  church." 
The  same  thing  might  be  said  of  these  epistles,  for  they 
have  even  less  general  interest  than  the  Pastoral  Epistles 
have,  and  yet  they  have  been  treasured  by  the  general 
church. 

2.  They  are  unoriginal,  and  add  almost  nothing  to  the 
treasury  of  New  Testament  truth.  Of  the  thirteen  verses 
in  Second  John,  eight  are  repeated  in  substance  in  First 
John.  There  is  only  one  distinctive  passage  in  each  of 
these  Minor  Epistles — 2  John  10,  11  and  3  John  9,  10. 

3.  Holtzmann  calls  these  two  epistles  Zwillings-geschwis- 
ter,  "twin  sisters."  Jerome  had  given  them  the  same  name. 
They  belong  together.  They  have  the  same  general  charac- 
teristics. Short  as  they  are,  we  note  a  general  agreement, 
(i)  in  the  use  of  peculiar  expressions,  (2)  in  similar  gram- 
matical constructions,  (3)  in  the  association  of  the  same 
ideas,  (4)  in  the  definitions  given  to  favorite  terms,  and 
(5)  in  the  object  they  aim  at — the  consolation  of  believers 
in  special  trials  and  their  strengthening  with  apostolic 
advice  and  authority. 

II.     The  External  Evidence 

There  seems  to  have  been  a  comparative  lack  of  acquaint- 
ance with  these  two  epistles  in  the  early  church.    There 

205 


2o6  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

are  at  least  three  good  reasons  for  this.  i.  Their  brevity. 
They  are  the  shortest  writings  in  the  sacred  canon.  2.  Their 
unimportant  character.  We  could  spare  them  from  the 
sacred  canon  more  easily  than  any  other  two  books  there. 
3.  Their  lack  of  any  special  or  original  matter.  As  private 
letters  they  did  not  appeal  to  the  interest  of  the  general 
church.  They  were  so  simple  and  clear  in  their  meaning 
that  they  did  not  need  any  commentary.  One  can  easily 
see  how  in  making  up  a  collection  of  writings  for  use  in 
the  public  worship  of  any  church  these  epistles  might  have 
been  omitted,  even  though  the  compiler  had  known  of  their 
existence.  Taking  these  things  into  consideration,  the  ex- 
ternal evidence  for  these  epistles  is  as  good  as  could  be 
expected. 

Irenaeus  quotes  2  John  10,  11  as  the  words  of  "John, 
the  disciple  of  the  Lord."  Clement  of  Alexandria  quotes 
from  them,  and  it  may  be  that  he  commented  on  them  in  a 
book  now  lost.  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  speaks  of  the 
apostle  John  writing  the  Second  and  the  Third  Epistles 
"anonymously,  as  the  presbyter."  The  church  in  North 
Africa  recognized  the  Second  Epistle  in  a  synod  held  at 
Carthage  A.  D.  256.  It  was  included  in  the  Itala.  Salmond 
sums  up  the  favorable  evidence  for  the  Second  Epistle  as 
follows:  "The  most  ancient  historical  testimony,  therefore, 
although  it  is  of  limited  quantity,  is  in  favor  of  the  author- 
ship by  the  apostle  John.  It  is  testimony  that  comes  from 
sources  so  far  apart  as  Gaul,  Alexandria,  and  North  Africa. 
It  is  confirmed  by  the  resemblance  of  Second  John  to  First 
John;  the  considerations  which  go  to  establish  the  Johan- 
nine  origin  of  the  latter  being  so  far  available  also  for  the 
Johannine  origin  of  the  former."^  This  resemblance  to  the 
style  of  John  is,  of  course,  equally  true  of  the  Third  Epistle. 

On  the  other  hand,  Origen  puts  these  epistles  among  the 
doubtful  writings  of  the  New  Testament  canon,  and  he 


*  Hastings's  Bible  Dictionary,  vol.  ii,  740. 


THE  MINOR  EPISTLES  OF  JOHN  207 

never  uses  them  or  quotes  from  them  himself.  Eusebius 
put  them  among  the  Antilegomena.  They  were  rejected 
by  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia.  They  were  not  noticed  by 
Theodoret.  They  were  mentioned  doubtfully  by  Gregory 
of  Nazianzen.  They  were  not  included  in  the  Peshito,  the 
Bible  of  the  Syrian  Church,  though  they  are  mentioned 
by  Ephraem,  the  greatest  of  the  Syrian  Fathers.  When 
First  John,  First  Peter,  and  James  had  been  admitted  to 
the  Syrian  canon,  these  epistles  were  still  excluded,  and 
they  are  not  found  in  The  Syrian  New  Testament  until 
1630.  They  are  not  quoted  by  Tertullian  or  by  Cyprian, 
and  as  late  as  the  fourth  century  there  seems  to  have  been 
determined  opposition  to  their  admission  to  the  canon  of 
the  church  in  North  Africa.  The  testimony  of  the  Mura- 
torian  Fragment  is  doubtful,  since  the  text  is  too  corrupt 
for  us  to  be  sure  of  it.  Jerome  received  the  two  epistles 
as  canonical,  but  he  says,  "Many  say  that  John  the  pres- 
byter wrote  them." 

It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  the  testimony  for  these  two 
epistles  is  not  as  good  as  that  for  most  of  our  New  Testa- 
ment books.  We  may  consider  the  reasons  we  have  as- 
signed as  sufficient  to  account  for  this,  or  we  may  decide 
to  regard  these  epistles  as  of  lesser  authority  and  minor 
importance  among  the  New  Testament  writings. 

III.     The  Internal  Evidence 

This  seems  to  be  better  than  the  external  evidence,  for, 
as  Salmond  says  of  the  three  Johannine  epistles,  "They  are 
so  much  of  the  same  stamp  that  in  all  ages  the  prevailing, 
if  not  absolutely  universal,  opinion  has  been,  that  they 
come  from  the  same  mint  and  are  by  the  same  hand.  They 
are  writings  in  which  the  profound  and  the  simple  kiss 
each  other,  great  and  inexhaustible  thoughts  being  wedded 
to  the  clearest  and  least  ambitious  terms.  They  combine 
the  qualities  of  majesty,  maturity,  authority,  and  serenity 


2o8  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

with  occasional  fire  and  vehement  utterance.  ...  It  has 
been  the  prevaiHng  behef  from  the  oldest  times  that  they 
are  all  three  apostolic  writings,  and  part  of  the  legacy  of 
the  beloved  disciple  to  the  church."^  They  have  the  Johan- 
nine  spirit  and  style,  ideas  and  ideals.  They  use  the 
Johannine  words  in  the  Johannine  way.  Weiss  says,  "It 
is  quite  incomprehensible  how  these  two  small  epistles 
could  have  maintained  their  position  and  acquired  canonical 
authority  in  the  church  unless  they  had  been  handed  down 
as  apostolic  memorials."^ 

IV.     John  the  Elder 

If  the  apostle  wrote  these  epistles,  why  did  he  call  him- 
self "the  elder"  ?^  We  may  suggest  several  reasons. 
I.  Papias  evidently  used  this  title  to  represent  all  of  those 
who  had  companied  with  the  Lord.  He  calls  all  of  the 
apostles  by  this  name.  If  this  was  a  general  church  desig- 
nation for  these  revered  fathers  and  leaders  in  the  faith, 
this  last  survivor  of  their  number  very  fittingly  might  call 
himself  "the  elder,"  the  one  remaining  representative  of  a 
generation  past.  2.  John's  great  age  would  in  itself  be  a 
sufficient  occasion  for  his  choice  of  this  name,  as  Credner 
and  Bleek  have  seen.  3.  It  may  have  been  an  official  title 
and  have  represented  his  position  of  dignity  in  the  church, 
as  Liicke  and  Diisterdieck  have  thought.  Did  not  Peter 
write  in  his  epistle,  "The  elders  therefore  among  you  I 
exhort,  who  am  a  fellow  elder"  P^  As  Peter  here  puts 
himself  on  a  plane  of  equality  with  other  officials  in  the 
church,  so  John  may  have  hesitated  to  arrogate  to  himself 
any  superior  claims  as  an  apostle,  and  with  characteristic 
modesty  have  called  himself  an  elder  with  only  the  au- 
thority any  elder  might  have. 

There  may  have  been  something  of  all  of  these  reasons 

^  Hastings's  Bible  Dictionary,  vol.  ii,  p.  728. 

'  Introduction,  vol.  ii,  p.  197. 

*  2  John  I  and  3  John  i.  *  I  Pet.  5.  I. 


THE  MINOR  EPISTLES  OF  JOHN  209 

entering  into  John's  choice  of  this  title.  He  may  have 
meant  to  say  to  those  to  whom  he  wrote:  "I  am  an  official 
in  the  church.  I  am  the  most  aged  among  them.  I  belong 
to  that  company  who  were  supremely  privileged  in  the 
fact  that  they  saw  and  loved  and  lived  with  the  Lord  of 
truth  and  love  and  life.    Hear  me,  therefore." 

V.    The  Person  Addressed  in  the  Second  Epistle 

The  best  reading  is  skXekt^  Kvgig..  How  shall  we  translate 
these  words?  If  they  represent  a  proper  name,  three  possi- 
bilities are  open  to  us : 

1.  We  may  read  "to  the  elect  Kyria."  Athanasius  so 
understood  it.  He  says,  "John  is  writing  to  Kyria  and 
her  children."  Bengel,  Liicke,  Diisterdieck,  Bruckner, 
De  Wette,  Guericke,  Credner,  Neander,  Olshausen,  Bishop 
Alexander,  Dean  Alford,  Davidson,  Bleek,  Ebrard,  and 
others  have  followed  the  opinion  of  Athanasius  at  this 
point.  This  proper  name  has  been  found  upon  an  ancient 
inscription.  It  corresponds  to  the  Hebrew  name  "Martha," 
inasmuch  as  both  are  feminine  forms  of  the  word  for 
"Lord."  The  address  of  the  Second  Epistle  would  be 
like  the  address  of  the  Third  Epistle,  if  both  contained  a 
proper  name.  However,  the  Third  Epistle  is  addressed 
to  Gains  the  beloved;  and  this  is  the  natural  order  of  the 
Greek.  If  John  had  been  writing  to  a  woman  whose  name 
was  Kyria  and  he  had  desired  to  call  her  "the  chosen  one" 
or  "the  elect,"  he  ought  to  have  transposed  the  order  of 
the  words  in  the  Greek  and  written  "Kyria  the  elect" 
rather  than  "the  elect  Kyria,"  just  as  in  Rom.  16.  13  we 
find  'Foixpov  rdv  sKkeKrov,  "Rufus  the  elect." 

2.  Following  this  order  in  the  Greek,  it  would  be  possible 
to  translate  "to  Eclecta  the  lady."  Clement  of  Alexandria 
so  understood  it.  He  says,  "The  epistle  was  written  to  a 
Babylonian  lady  named  Eclecta."  Grotius,  Wetstein,  and 
Bishop  Middleton  have  followed  the  opinion  of  Clement 


2IO  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

at  this  point.  Our  objections  to  this  view  are  that  (i) 
though  the  masculine  form  "Eclectus"  occurs  as  a  proper 
name,  we  know  of  no  example  of  the  use  of  the  feminine 
form  "Eclecta"  as  the  name  of  a  woman,  and  (2)  we  would 
be  under  the  necessity  of  reading  in  the  thirteenth  verse, 
"The  children  of  thy  sister  Eclecta  salute  thee,"  and  that 
would  give  us  two  women  of  the  same  strange  name  in  one 
family.    This  seems  most  unlikely. 

3.  We  might  translate  both  words  as  proper  names  and 
read,  "To  Eclecta  Kyria,"  but  this  would  give  to  one 
woman  two  very  unusual  names,  one  very  rare  and  the 
other  without  a  parallel. 

4.  If  we  decide  that  neither  of  the  words  represents  a 
proper  name,  then  the  best  translation  is  "to  the  elect  lady." 
With  this  translation  there  are  at  least  three  interpretations 
of  the  phrase:  (i)  Jerome  declared  that  this  epistle  was 
addressed  to  the  general  church  under  this  title.  Hilgen- 
feld,  Liinemann,  and  Schmiedel  have  followed  him  in  this 
opinion.  This  suggestion  surely  goes  to  pieces  on  verse  13. 
What  could  the  phrase,  "the  children  of  thy  elect  sister" 
mean?  (2)  CEcumenius  and  Theophylact  said  that  an  indi- 
vidual church  was  addressed  under  this  form.  A  large 
number  of  modern  scholars  have  adopted  this  view,  among 
them  Michaelis,  Huther,  Hammond,  Hilgenfeld,  Baur, 
Wordsworth,  Ewald,  Luthardt,  Lightfoot,  Salmon,  Hof- 
mann,  Holtzmann,  Wieseler,  Weiss,  Wolf,  Whitby,  and 
Whiston. 

At  the  close  of  Peter's  epistle  we  read,  "She  that  is  in 
Babylon,  elect  together  with  you,  saluteth  you."^  This  is 
very  generally  understood  to  mean,  "The  church  in  Babylon 
salutes  you."  It  is  argued  that  here  we  have  a  parallel 
case  in  which  the  elect  sister  is  an  individual  church.  How- 
ever, it  seems  doubtful  that  any  such  symbolism  should  be 
introduced  into  a  short  epistle  like  Second  John,  and  it 

«  I  Pet.  5.  13. 


THE  MINOR  EPISTLES  OF  JOHN  211 

would  be  without  a  parallel  in  the  New  Testament  if  an 
individual  church  should  be  called  a  "lady."  The  church 
is  called  the  bride  of  Christ,  in  a  book  which  is  given  up 
to  religious  symbolism  from  beginning  to  end,'  but  in  no 
instance  is  the  church  called  a  lady.  (3)  There  remains, 
therefore,  only  one  possible  understanding  of  this  phrase. 
The  person  addressed  is  "the  elect  lady,"  der  auserwdhlten 
Frau,  as  Luther  translated  it,  and  this  elect  lady  is  some 
woman  with  whom  the  apostle  had  become  acquainted  and 
in  whose  home  in  all  probability  he  had  been  entertained, 
and  in  whose  children  he  had  come  to  take  a  personal 
interest.  This  is  the  conclusion  of  our  English  versions. 
Beza,  Schleiermacher,  Mill,  Macknight,  Lardner,  Plummer, 
Farrar,  Salmond,  and  others  agree. 

VI.    Some  Notes  on  the  Second  Epistle 

1.  Keynotes.  The  word  "truth"  occurs  five  times,  "love" 
four  times,  "commandment,"  four  times.  These  may  be 
called  the  keynotes  of  the  epistle.  The  term  "walking"  is 
found  three  times.  These  Christians  are  walking  in  the 
truth  (verse  4).  They  are  exhorted  to  walk  after  the 
Lord's  commandment  (verse  6).  This  is  declared  to  be  a 
proof  of  love  (verse  6).  Walking  in  love,  walking  in 
obedience,  walking  in  truth — these  are  three  definitions  of 
the  Christian  life.  In  a  sense  they  are  synonymous,  and 
in  a  sense  they  are  complementary.  Love  leads  to  obe- 
dience and  cannot  be  maintained  without  it.  Obedience, 
unless  it  is  servile  and  unworthy,  is  the  result  of  love  and 
the  manifest  proof  of  it.  Both  obedience  and  love  demand 
truth  in  the  inward  parts.  They  flourish  only  in  the  realm 
of  reality. 

2.  The  deceiver  and  the  antichrist  mentioned  in  the 
seventh  verse  is  the  one  who  denies  the  reality  of  the 
incarnation,  the  one  who  does  not  confess  that  Jesus  Christ 

'  Rev.  21.  9. 


212  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

came  in  the  flesh.  He  who  robs  the  church  or  any  indi- 
vidual beHever  of  a  real  faith  in  the  genuine  humanity  of 
Jesus  does  an  irreparable  injury. 

3.  In  verses  10  and  11  John  the  Boanerges  tells  us  how  to 
treat  such  heretics  and  deceivers.  He  tells  us  to  give  them 
neither  greeting  nor  lodging.  One  winter  night  some  years 
ago  I  was  seated  before  the  blazing  logs  in  the  fireplace  of  a 
comfortable  farmhouse  in  southern  Ohio,  when  we  were 
startled  by  a  loud  halloo  at  the  garden  gate  outside.  The 
farmer  went  out  to  see  what  was  wanted.  He  returned 
a  few  moments  later  and  said  that  two  men  who  had  an- 
nounced themselves  as  Mormon  missionaries  had  asked  for 
a  night's  lodging  and  he  had  turned  them  away.  It  was 
about  ten  o'clock  at  night  and  bitter  cold.  There  were  no 
hotels  within  many  miles.  I  wondered  what  the  poor  fel- 
lows would  do.  I  asked  my  uncle  about  it,  and  he  did  not 
seem  much  interested.  He  simply  remarked  that  they  did 
not  want  men  like  that  in  their  neighborhood.  I  learned 
the  next  day  that  those  two  Mormon  missionaries  had  gone 
on  down  the  country  road,  asking  for  entertainment  at 
every  farmhouse  they  found  on  it,  and  they  had  been 
turned  away  from  every  door  until  they  had  traveled  about 
twelve  miles  and  it  was  two  o'clock  at  night.  Then  they 
found  a  man  who  allowed  them  to  sleep  on  the  hay  in 
his  barn  until  morning. 

There  had  been  no  collusion  among  those  neighbors. 
They  had  not  been  expecting  these  visitors.  Every  man 
had  decided  for  himself  that  he  could  not  afford  to  grant 
them  hospitality.  It  was  no  lack  of  the  milk  of  human 
kindness.  I  never  knew  a  community  more  generous  with 
lodgings  and  meals  and  more  unstinted  in  its  hospitality 
on  ordinary  occasions.  The  only  reason  for  that  treatment 
of  these  men  was  that  they  announced  themselves  as  Mor- 
mon propagandists,  and  every  one  of  those  Ohio  farmers 
decided  at  once  that  he  would  not  be  a  party  to  the  intro- 
duction of  any  such  despicable  doctrine,  even  to  the  extent 


THE  MINOR  EPISTLES  OF  JOHN  213 

of  harboring  its  missionaries  over  one  night.  They  were 
all  of  them  patriots.  That  neighborhood  had  sent  its  sons 
without  hesitation  into  the  ranks  in  the  Civil  War.  They 
believed  that  Mormonism  was  heretical  and  treasonable 
and  they  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  it.  They  were 
largely  of  Puritan  stock  and  they  had  the  downright  spirit 
of  a  Boanerges  in  their  adherence  to  principle.  They  were 
literally  faithful  to  the  command  of  John  in  this  epistle, 
although  it  may  be  doubtful  if  any  one  among  them  thought 
of  it  or  knew  about  it.  John  says,  "If  any  one  cometh 
unto  you,  and  bringeth  not  this  [Christian]  teaching,  re- 
ceive him  not  into  your  house,  and  give  him  no  greeting: 
for  he  that  giveth  him  greeting  partaketh  in  his  evil 
works."^ 

Does  this  seem  rather  harsh  when  taken  as  a  general 
principle?  The  general  principle  is  simply  that  we  must 
not  become  partakers  in  evil  deeds.  Any  social  amenities 
which  fall  short  of  that  may  be  allowable.  However,  it 
would  be  well  to  remember  that  the  apostle  John  in  all 
probability  is  not  laying  down  general  principles  here,  but 
giving  advice  to  a  particular  woman  in  a  particular  situa- 
tion. Since  John  addresses  this  lady  and  says  nothing  of 
her  husband,  it  might  be  a  fair  supposition  that  she  was  a 
widow  and  had  by  her  bereavement  come  to  be  the  re- 
sponsible head  of  the  household.  Then  as  a  widow  the 
hospitality  of  her  home  would  need  to  be  specially  guarded ; 
and  as  a  widow  the  care  of  her  children  would  need  to  be 
more  particularly  a  matter  of  concern. 

Designing  men  must  not  be  admitted  within  the  circle  of 
her  family,  for  her  children  might  be  led  astray  by  those 
whose  only  intent  was  to  deceive.  Their  salvation  and 
their  security  from  harm  was  her  first  concern,  and  all  else 
was  to  bend  to  that  end.  No  one  must  be  permitted  under 
the   shelter  of  her  roof  to  undermine  the   faith  of  her 

82  John  10,  II. 


214  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

family;  and  if  the  zealous  propagators  of  any  form  of 
evil  heresy  were  known  to  be  about  the  town,  it  would  be 
just  as  well  for  the  woman  who  was  the  head  of  a  family 
to  abstain  from  all  social  intercourse  with  them.  If  she 
did  not  know  them,  she  would  be  free  from  all  obligation 
to  them  and  need  not  even  greet  them  on  the  street.  From 
this  point  of  view  the  command  of  the  apostle  does  not 
seem  so  harsh,  and  it  may  have  been  justified  absolutely 
by  the  circumstances  of  the  particular  case,  concerning 
which  we  know  nothing.  It  may  well  have  a  lesson  for  us 
against  undue  laxity  and  indifference  indicated  by  the  social 
and  personal  recognition  of  heresy  until  we  are  hindered 
by  our  sense  of  hospitality  and  social  obligation  from  bear- 
ing our  decided  testimony  against  doctrinal  error  of  the 
most  insidious  and  deceptive  kind.  A  little  more  loyalty 
to  principle  and  a  little  more  readiness  to  stand  by  our 
colors  would  not  hurt  most  of  us  to-day. 

4.  Upon  our  understanding  of  the  person  addressed  in 
this  epistle  it  bears  its  tribute  to  the  dignity  of  wifehood 
and  motherhood  and  womanhood.  John  recognizes  this 
elect  sister  as  the  head  of  her  household  and  her  home  as 
the  conservator  of  the  Christian  virtues  and  graces.  John 
knew  the  influence  of  a  good  mother  himself.  Here  in 
Ephesus  in  his  old  age  he  recalled  the  ministries  of  Salome 
in  that  Galilaean  home  so  many  years  before.  Later  he  had 
had  in  his  own  home  the  mother  of  his  Lord.  Mary  and 
Salome  must  have  been  ideal  mothers,  and  John  honored 
their  memory  by  honoring  this  mother  in  addressing  one 
of  his  epistles  to  her.  She  was  an  elect  lady,  and  therefore 
John  wrote  her.  John  wrote  her  a  letter,  and  therefore 
she  will  be  an  elect  lady  for  evermore. 

VII.    Notes  on  the  Third  Epistle 

I.  The  word  "truth"  occurs  six  times,  and  is  the  dominant 
wpr4  in  the  epistle. 


THE  MINOR  EPISTLES  OF  JOHN  215 

2.  In  the  ninth  verse  there  is  a  reference  to  a  former 
epistle,  which  in  all  probability  is  a  lost  epistle.  There 
seems  to  be  no  reason  for  supposing  that  the  reference  is 
to  either  First  or  Second  John.  We  judge  that  it  had  to 
do  with  the  affairs  of  this  local  church  and  probably  it 
contained  some  introductions  or  recommendations  of  travel- 
ing evangelists  who  represented  the  apostle  John  or  had 
his  indorsement,  but  whom  Diotrephes  would  not  receive. 

3.  The  facts  given  here  suggest  a  very  interesting  picture 
of  early  church  life.  They  furnish  us  a  glimpse  of  the  in- 
side difficulties  of  administration  and  discipline  besetting 
the  church  even  in  these  beginning  days. 

4.  The  three  names  mentioned  may  stand  as  types  of 
three  characters  to  be  found  in  almost  every  local  church 
history.  There  is  Gains  the  beloved.  He  may  have  an 
invalid  body,  but  he  has  a  robust  soul.  He  walks  in  the 
truth  and  proves  his  love  to  the  brethren  by  the  bounty  of 
his  hospitality  to  them  whenever  they  visit  this  church. 
The  apostle  John  always  enjoyed  entertainment  in  his  home. 
Then  there  is  the  domineering  Diotrephes,  who  is  ambitious 
to  be  the  church  dictator.  He  heads  the  opposition  party 
and  is  a  man  of  fluent  and  persuasive  speech.  He  has  influ- 
ence enough  to  make  things  unpleasant  for  Gains  and  even 
to  threaten  his  expulsion  from  the  membership.  Against 
the  authority  of  the  apostle  John  he  prates  with  wicked 
words.  Then  there  is  Demetrius,  who  may  be  the  innocent 
cause  of  all  of  the  present  trouble.  He  is  a  worthy  man 
and  has  a  good  reputation  everywhere.  He  has  come  into 
this  community  with  the  indorsement  of  the  apostle  John 
and  he  has  been  entertained  by  Gains;  and  that  is  enough 
to  settle  his  case  with  Diotrephes.  The  latter  decides  to 
drive  him  out  of  that  neighborhood  and  to  discipline  or  cast 
out  of  the  church  Gains,  his  hospitable  host.  Possibly  he 
has  succeeded  in  doing  both  things,  and  the  apostle  John 
having  heard  of  it  writes  this  epistle  to  Gains  to  reassure 
him  concerning  Demetrius  and  to  comfort  him  with  his 


2i6  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

word  of  approval  for  all  he  had  done.  In  the  Second 
Epistle  the  apostle  warned  the  elect  lady  against  the  abuse 
of  her  hospitality  by  the  unauthorized  and  heretical  itiner- 
ants who  under  the  guise  of  a  religious  propaganda  made 
their  way  into  Christian  homes  and  led  many  astray.  In 
the  Third  Epistle  he  praises  the  hospitality  of  Gaius,  whose 
home  has  been  opened  to  the  duly  authorized  and  wholly 
worthy  itinerant  evangelist  Demetrius,  and  who  has  brought 
trouble  upon  his  own  head  in  so  doing.  Both  epistles  have 
to  do  with  the  subject  of  hospitality,  with  the  refusal  of 
hospitality  to  some  and  with  the  continuance  of  hospitality 
to  others. 

VIII.    Value  of  These  Epistles 

I.  They  are  of  great  interest  to  the  church  historian. 
They  present  a  picture  of  the  condition  of  affairs  in  the 
period  of  transition  from  the  apostolic  to  the  postapostolic 
times.  They  suggest  the  errors  of  doctrine  and  the  troubles 
of  internal  organization  with  which  the  early  church  had  to 
contend.  Evidently,  there  were  teachers  of  heresy  and 
ambitious  church  laymen  from  the  very  beginning.  Har- 
nack  thinks  that  Diotrephes  was  the  first  bishop  of  the 
monarchical  type  whose  name  is  mentioned  in  history.  We 
think,  rather,  that  the  apostle  John  was  the  bishop  whose 
authority  had  been  supreme  in  this  church  and  that  Diotre- 
phes was  a  layman  who  aspired  to  be  the  church  autocrat 
and  was  ready  to  defy  the  representatives  of  John  and  to 
oppose  their  preaching  with  his  blatant  doubts  and  denials 
and  many  wicked  words. 

Anyway,  in  both  the  churches  of  which  we  are  given 
glimpses  in  these  epistles  there  were  those  who  walked  in 
the  truth  and  those  who  went  about  with  the  purpose  to 
deceive.  There  were  the  good  and  loving  and  obedient 
and  there  were  the  wicked  and  hateful  and  self-willed. 
There  was  the  spirit  of  the  Christ  and  the  spirit  of  the  anti- 
christ.    There   were   traveling   evangelists   who   had   the 


THE  MINOR  EPISTLES  OF  JOHN  217 

witness  of  the  truth  and  there  were  traveling  heretics  who 
did  not  deserve  a  friendly  greeting  in  the  street.  There 
were  homes  hospitably  open  to  the  good  and  homes  closed 
tight  against  the  bad.  There  was  very  much  the  same 
condition  we  find  in  any  small  country  church  community 
to-day. 

,  2.  These  epistles  are  of  interest  to  all  devout  people  for 
the  deep  spirituality  of  their  contents,  although  that  might 
have  been  found  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament  if  these 
two  epistles  had  been  lost. 

3.  Together  with  the  Epistle  to  Philemon  they  "furnish 
an  apostolic  sanction  to  private  letters  on  religious  themes."^ 
It  is  questionable  whether  any  apostolic  sanction  would 
have  been  needed  for  such  religious  correspondence;  but 
these  letters  are  interesting  as  the  first  specimens  extant  of 
that  worthy  department  of  world  literature.  The  world 
surely  would  be  much  poorer  if  it  were  deprived  of  the 
letters  of  Basil  and  Gregory  of  Nazianzen  and  Gregory  of 
Nyssa  and  Gregory  the  Great  and  Jerome  and  Augustine 
and  Luther  and  Bengel  and  John  Newton  and  Cowper  and 
Doddridge  and  McCheyne  and  Robertson  and  Romaine 
and  John  Wesley  and  Samuel  Rutherford.  Rutherford's 
Letters  are  better  known  to-day  than  his  sermons  or  his 
theological  works.  When  they  had  been  gathered  into  a 
volume  and  published,  Richard  Baxter  said  of  them,  "Hold 
off  the  Bible,  such  a  book  the  world  never  saw."  McCheyne 
was  a  saintly  soul,  and  his  biography  shows  that  Ruther- 
ford's Letters  and  the  Bible  were  the  two  books  he  took 
with  him  into  the  closet  of  prayer. 

John  Wesley's  Letters  deserve  to  be  read  much  more 
than  they  are  to-day.  Many  of  them  are  worthy  to  rank 
with  the  best  of  the  church's  treasures  of  this  kind.  These 
New  Testament  epistles  are  gems  of  the  first  order.  Paul 
and  John  knew  how  to  say  much  in  little  and  how  to  say 


*  Donald  Fraser,  Lectures  on  the  Bible,  vol.  ii,  p.  291, 


2i8  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

it  well.  It  is  not  an  easy  thing  to  write  a  good  religious 
letter.  Those  of  us  whose  duty  it  is  sometimes  to  write 
them  have  learned  that  by  experience.  As  apostolic  models 
these  letters  may  suggest  some  points  of  excellence  in  corre- 
spondence of  this  character.  Religious  letters  should  be 
brief.  They  should  go  straight  to  the  point.  They  should 
be  free  from  platitudes.  They  should  be  courteous,  sym- 
pathetic, true  to  the  facts  and  true  to  the  spirit  of  Christ. 

4.  Their  teaching  is  valuable.  They  tell  us  how  to  con- 
duct ourselves  toward  heretical  propagandists.  They  incul- 
cate due  respect  for  worthy  laymen  and  laywomen  and  love 
and  help  for  all  preachers  who  have  made  sacrifices  for 
"the  sake  of  the  Name."  Daniel  Steele  used  to  declare  that 
they  made  him  more  contented  with  presiding  elders  and 
bishops,  district  or  general  superintendents  who  could  step 
in  when  it  was  necessary  and  support  the  pastor  and  teach 
a  usurper  better  manners.  When  the  general  superintend- 
ents are  on  the  right  side  they  are  a  great  comfort.  If 
they  should  happen  to  be  on  the  side  of  the  rich  and  the 
ambitious  as  against  the  pious  and  the  poor,  their  interfer- 
ence is  not  always  most  helpful. 

5.  Professor  J.  Rendel  Harris  has  suggested  that  these 
two  epistles  may  serve  us  in  some  of  our  problems  of 
textual  criticism.  He  calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  the 
Second  Epistle  has  1,143  letters,  and  the  Third  has  1,124. 
In  the  Second  Epistle  at  the  976th  letter  John  says,  "Hav- 
ing many  things  to  write  unto  you,  I  would  not  write  them 
with  paper  and  ink."  In  the  Third  Epistle  at  the  967th 
letter  John  says,  "I  had  many  things  to  write  unto  thee, 
but  I  am  unwilling  to  write  them  to  thee  with  ink  and  pen." 
The  closing  greetings  in  the  Second  Epistle  have  168  letters, 
and  in  the  Third  Epistle  158  letters.  Now,  Professor  Harris 
suggests  that  John  closed  his  epistles  at  just  this  point  and 
with  the  use  of  just  so  many  letters  because  he  saw  that 
he  was  at  the  end  of  his  sheet. 

Beginning  with  this  clue,  Professor  Harris  pursues  his 


THE  MINOR  EPISTLES  OF  JOHN  219 

investigations  through  various  fields  of  prices,  styles,  and 
measures  of  ancient  writing  materials  and  comes  out  at  last 
upon  the  proposition  that  he  can  tell  just  how  many  pages 
of  just  what  size  the  original  copy  of  each  of  our  New 
Testament  books  had,  and  he  thinks  that  he  can  decide 
within  half  a  dozen  letters  just  how  many  letters  each  page 
contained.  Applying  the  measuring  rule  thus  obtained,  he 
has  a  means  of  deciding  between  the  longer  and  the  shorter 
readings  in  our  New  Testament  text.  He  concludes,  for 
example,  against  Matt.  17.  21,  "This  kind  goeth  not  out 
but  by  prayer  and  fasting."  This  verse  is  not  found  in  our 
New  Testament  to-day.  There  were  better  reasons  for  its 
rejection  than  this  application  of  Professor  Harris's  measur- 
ing rule ;  but  it  surely  is  interesting  to  find  that  his  rule 
agrees  with  the  readings  of  the  oldest  and  best  texts  at  this 
point. 

Incidentally,  these  two  short  epistles  may  serve  us  in  the 
ways  we  have  indicated.  They  do  not  compare  in  impor- 
tance with  the  First  Epistle,  of  course.  They  were  slower 
in  obtaining  recognition  in  the  New  Testament  canon. 
However,  we  are  glad  that  they  have  been  preserved  for  us. 
They  are  worthy  of  the  apostle  John.  They  give  us  some 
added  glimpse  of  his  abiding  characteristics.  He  is  the 
same  saintly  Boanerges  we  have  known  from  other  sources. 
He  may  have  written  these  epistles  at  almost  any  time  dur- 
ing his  ministry  in  Asia  Minor. 


PART  V 
THE  APOCALYPSE 


PART  V 
THE  APOCALYPSE 

I.    Relation  to  the  Other  Johannine  Writings 

The  Apocalypse  is  a  unique  book.  All  the  other  books 
of  our  New  Testament  are  histories  or  letters.  John  wrote 
one  of  the  histories  and  three  of  the  letters.  The  Apoca- 
lypse represents  an  entirely  different  form  of  literature. 
It  is  so  different,  not  only  from  all  the  other  books  of  the 
New  Testament  but  also  from  the  other  books  written  by 
John,  that  Dionysius  of  Alexandria  was  sure  that  we  had 
a  new  author  here  as  well  as  a  new  vehicle  of  literary 
expression.  So  little  has  been  added  to  what  Dionysius 
said  on  this  subject  that  in  enumerating  the  differences 
between  the  Apocalypse  and  the  other  writings  of  John  we 
may  as  well  begin  with  his  statement  of  the  case. 

Dionysius  was  Bishop  of  Alexandria  about  the  middle  of 
the  third  century,  succeeding  the  great  Origen  as  the  head 
of  the  catechetical  school  in  that  city.  He  decided  that  John 
did  not  write  the  Apocalypse,  and  he  gave  the  following 
reasons,  i.  "The  evangelist  nowhere  gives  his  name,  or 
proclaims  himself,  either  in  the  Gospel  or  epistle.  .  .  .  But 
the  author  of  the  Apocalypse  introduces  himself  in  the  very 
beginning.  The  Revelation  of  Jesus  Christ,  which  he  gave 
him  to  show  unto  his  servants  quickly;  and  he  sent  and 
signified  it  by  his  angel  unto  his  servant  John,  who  bare 
witness  of  the  word  of  God  and  of  his  testimony,  even  of  all 
things  that  he  saw,  i.  i,  2.  Then  he  writes  also  an  epistle; 
John  to  the  seven  churches  which  are  in  Asia,  grace  be 
with  you,  and  peace,  i.  4.  But  the  evangelist  did  not  prefix 
his  name  even  to  the  Catholic  Epistle;  but  without  intro- 

223 


224  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

duction  he  begins  with  the  mystery  of  the  divine  revelation 
itself:  That  which  was  from  the  beginning,  which  we  have 
heard,  which  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes,  i  John  i.  i. 
Neither  in  the  reputed  Second  and  Third  Epistle  of  John, 
though  they  are  very  short,  does  the  name  John  appear; 
but  there  is  written  the  anonymous  phrase,  'the  elder.'  But 
this  author  did  not  consider  it  sufficient  to  give  his  name 
once  and  to  proceed  with  his  work ;  but  he  takes  it  up  again : 
I,  John,  who  also  am  your  brother  and  companion  in  tribula- 
tion, and  in  the  kingdom  and  the  patience  of  Jesus  Christ, 
was  in  the  isle  that  is  called  Patmos  for  the  Word  of  God 
and  the  testimony  of  Jesus,  i.  9.  And  toward  the  close  he 
speaks  thus :  Blessed  is  he  that  keepeth  the  words  of  the 
prophecy  of  this  book,  and  I,  John,  who  saw  and  heard 
these  things.    22.  7,  8."i 

This,  then,  is  the  first  difference  which  Dionysius  points 
out.  In  the  Gospel  and  in  the  epistles  John  seems  bent  upon 
concealing  his  own  identity.  At  least  we  decided  that  his 
modesty  was  apparent  in  his  evident  omission  of  his  own 
name  and  the  suppression  of  his  own  personality  and  au- 
thority. He  mentions  himself  only  when  it  seemed  to  be  a 
necessity,  and  then  he  prefers  to  call  himself  by  some  title 
which  others  besides  himself  might  claim,  "the  elder,"  or 
"the  disciple  whom  Jesus  loved."  The  author  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse seems  bent  upon  emphasizing  his  own  personality.  He 
repeats  his  own  name  three  times  in  the  first  chapter  and 
once  more  at  the  close.  Is  this  consistent  with  the  character 
of  John  as  we  have  read  it  in  the  other  books? 

The  answer  usually  given  to  this  inquiry  is  as  follows : 
All  the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  anony- 
mous, except  Nehemiah.  All  the  prophetical  books,  on  the 
contrary,  have  the  author's  name  prefixed.  Here,  then, 
would  seem  to  be  the  rule  in  Hebrew  literature,  and  the 
writers  of  our  New  Testament,  being  Jews,  have  followed 

1  Eusebius,  Eccles.  Hist.,  vii,  25.  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers, 
Second  Series,  vol.  i,  p.  310. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  225 

it.  As  a  historian  John  suppresses  his  name.  As  a  prophet  ^ 
he  puts  his  name  at  the  very  forefront  of  his  work.  This 
may  be  a  satisfactory  and  sufficient  explanation  of  this 
manifest  difference  between  the  Gospel  and  the  Apocalypse. 
John  claims  to  be  a  prophet.  In  the  beginning  he  says, 
"Blessed  is  he  that  readeth,  and  they  that  hear  the  words 
of  the  prophecy."^  Again,  in  the  middle  of  the  book,  he 
records  that  he  was  told,  "Thou  must  prophesy  again  over 
many  peoples  and  nations  and  tongues  and  kings. "^  In 
the  closing  chapter  he  makes  three  several  statements  con- 
cerning "the  words  of  the  prophecy  of  this  book,"*  and 
the  angel  speaks  to  him  of  his  "brethren  the  prophets. "^ 
It  would  seem  clear,  therefore,  that  John  himself  believed  ^ 
that  he  belonged  to  the  illustrious  company  of  the  prophets 
of  Israel. 

However,  his  book  does  not  belong  properly  to  the  pro- 
phetic literature.  It  belongs,  rather,  to  the  department  of 
Apocalyptics ;  and  John  calls  it  rightly  by  that  title,  "The 
Apocalypse  of  Jesus  Christ."^  It  was  not  customary  among 
the  writers  of  the  Jewish  Apocalypses  for  the  author  to 
prefix  his  own  name  to  his  work  as  John  has  prefixed  his 
name  here.  If  John  is  the  author,  then  this  is  the  single 
instance  in  which  an  Apocalypse  is  published  under  the  real 
author's  name.  Therefore  if  we  attempt  to  explain  John's 
use  of  his  own  name  as  a  guarantee  for  his  own  work  upon 
the  basis  of  Jewish  custom,  we  must  acknowledge  that  he 
does  not  follow  the  Jewish  custom  for  works  of  this  charac- 
ter, but,  rather,  that  he  counts  himself  with  writers  of  an- 
other sort  and  follows  their  custom,  although  he  is  writing 
a  book  of  a  radically  different  character.  At  any  rate,  there 
is  this  striking  contrast  between  the  Gospel  and  the  Apoca- 
lypse and  between  the  epistles  and  the  Apocalypse,  as  Diony- 
sius  pointed  out.     The  name  is  prominent  here  and  wholly 

2  Rev.  I.  3.  8  Rev.  22.  9. 

3  Rev.  10.  II.  'Rev.  I.  I. 
*Rev.  22.  7,  10,  18,  19. 


226  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

lacking  there.  Dionysius  thought  that  that  fact  argued  dif- 
ferent authorship. 

He  goes  on  to  say  that  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse  does 
not  say  that  he  was  the  beloved  disciple  of  the  Lord,  or  the 
one  who  lay  on  his  breast,  or  the  brother  of  James,  or  in 
any  way  identify  himself  with  the  evangelist.  He  calls  him- 
self simply  our  brother  and  companion,  and  a  witness  of 
Jesus.  There  were  many  Johns,  like  John  Mark,  who  ac- 
companied Barnabas  and  Saul  in  their  first  missionary  jour- 
ney. The  apocalyptist  was  probably  a  John  resident  in 
Ephesus,  but  not  the  apostle.  He  gives  a  second  reason 
for  thinking  so,  as  follows: 

2.  "From  the  ideas,  and  from  the  words  and  their  ar- 
rangement, it  may  be  reasonably  conjectured  that  this  one 
is  different  from  that  one.  For  the  Gospel  and  the  epistle 
agree  with  each  other  and  begin  in  the  same  manner.  The 
one  says,  'In  the  beginning  was  the  Word' ;  the  other,  'That 
which  was  from  the  beginning.'  The  one:  'And  the  Word 
was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us,  and  we  beheld  his 
glory,  the  glory  as  of  the  only  begotten  of  the  Father' ;  the 
other  says  the  same  things  slightly  altered :  'Which  we  have 
heard,  which  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes ;  which  we  have 
looked  upon  and  our  hands  have  handled  of  the  Word  of 
life — and  the  life  was  manifested.'  .  .  .  John  discusses 
everything  under  the  same  heads  and  names ;  some  of  which 
we  will  briefly  mention.  Anyone  who  examines  carefully 
will  find  the  phrases  'The  life,'  'The  light,'  'Turning  from 
darkness,'  frequently  occurring  in  both;  also  continually, 
'Truth,'  'Grace,'  'Joy,'  'The  flesh  and  the  blood  of  the  Lord,' 
'The  judgment,'  'The  forgiveness  of  sins,'  'The  love  of  God 
toward  us,'  the  commandment  that  we  love  one  another,  that 
we  should  Keep  all  the  commandments;  the  Conviction  of 
the  world,  of  the  Devil,  of  the  Antichrist,  the  Promise  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Adoption  of  God,  the  Faith  continually 
required  of  us,  The  Father  and  the  Son,  occur  everywhere. 
In  fact,  it  is  plainly  to  be  seen  that  one  and  the  same  charac- 


THE  APOCALYPSE  227 

ter  marks  the  Gospel  and  the  epistle  throughout.  But  the 
Apocalypse  is  different  from  these  writings  and  foreign  to 
them;  not  touching,  nor  in  the  least  bordering  upon  them; 
almost,  so  to  speak,  without  even  a  syllable  in  common  with 
them."7 

We  must  agree  that  Dionysius  is  right  as  to  the  internal 
evidence  binding  the  Gospel  and  the  epistles  together.  His 
list  of  common  phrases  might  be  corrected  and  improved 
somewhat,  but  his  general  contention  is  good.  We  must 
agree,  again,  that  the  main  contents  of  the  Apocalypse  are 
in  striking  contrast  with  the  material  found  in  the  other 
writings  of  John,  although  the  closing  statement  of  Diony- 
sius that  they  have  scarcely  a  syllable  in  common  surely  is 
extravagant.  On  the  contrary,  a  close  study  of  these  books 
will  reveal  the  fact  that  together  with  their  broad  difference 
of  subject  matter  there  are  many  minor  points  of  resem- 
blance which  suggest  if  they  do  not  prove  common  author- 
ship. 

We  will  instance  a  few  of  these,  (i)  The  Logos  title  for  i^ 
our  Lord  is  found  in  the  prologue  of  the  Gospel,  in  the 
epistle,  and  in  the  Apocalypse;  and  in  no  other  books  of  the 
New  Testament.^  This  most  suggestive  link  between  the 
Christian  faith  and  the  Alexandrian  and  the  Greek  philoso- 
phy seems  to  be  peculiar  to  the  writings  of  John.  It  is  an 
indissoluble  bond  uniting  his  three  books  and  distinguishing 
them  from  all  others  in  the  New  Testament  times. 

(2)  Again  and  again  in  the  Apocalypse  the  victorious  ^ 
Jesus  is  called  the  Lamb.  Nowhere  else  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  this  title  given  to  the  Saviour,  except  in  the  Gospel 
according  to  John,  where  he  has  recorded  that  the  Baptist 
pointed  out  the  Master  to  him  in  the  beginning  with  the 
words,  "Behold,  the  Lamb  of  God,  that  taketh  away  the 
sin  of  the  world."^     John  never  forgot  that  text  of  the 


^  Op.  cii.,  pp.  310,  311. 

*  John  I.  I,  14;  I  John  i.  i;  Rev.  19.  13. 

•John  I.  29. 


y 


228  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

sermon  which  brought  him  to  Christ.  To  him  Jesus  always 
was  the  Lamb  of  God,  taking  away  the  sin  of  the  world. 
In  the  Apocalypse  it  is  the  Lamb  he  sees  from  the  begin- 
ning to  the  end  of  the  book.  Twenty-six  times  he  mentions 
him  in  the  twenty-two  chapters. 

He  is  the  Lamb  that  was  slain. ^^^  The  redeemed  wash 
their  robes  and  make  them  white  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb.^^ 
The  Lamb  is  on  the  throne. ^^  j^  the  New  Jerusalem  they 
need  no  sun,  for  the  Lamb  is  the  light  thereof. ^^  The  in- 
habitants of  that  city  rejoice  evermore;  for,  John  writes, 
"Blessed  are  they  that  are  bidden  to  the  marriage  supper 
of  the  Lamb."!^  "The  Lamb  that  is  in  the  midst  of  the 
throne  shall  be  their  shepherd,  and  shall  guide  them  unto 
fountains  of  waters  of  life."^^  There  are  those  who  cry 
for  the  rocks  to  hide  them  from  the  wrath  of  the  Lamb.^^ 
For  if  they  "war  against  the  Lamb,  the  Lamb  shall  over- 
come them,  for  he  is  Lord  of  lords,  and  King  of  kings."^^ 
John  the  Baptist  had  said,  "Behold,  the  Lamb  of  God !" 
John  the  evangelist  followed  Jesus  and  saw  him  live  the 
spotless  life,  and  die  on  the  cross;  and  then  in  apocalyptic 
vision  he  saw  him  at  the  head  of  heaven's  hosts  and  sitting 
on  heaven's  throne;  and  to  him  Jesus  was  the  Paschal 
Lamb,  slain  for  sin,  saving  from  sin.  To  him  heaven's  King 
was  a  warring,  overcoming,  purifying,  illuminating  Lamb  on 
the  throne.  This  title  furnishes  another  link  between  the 
Apocalypse  and  the  other  writings  of  John. 

(3)  In  the  very  beginning  of  the  Apocalypse  we  read, 
"Every  eye  shall  see  him,  and  they  that  pierced  him.''^^  The 
piercing  of  our  Lord's  side  is  recorded  in  only  one  of  our 
Gospels  and  that  is  the  fourth,  written  by  John.^^  The 
context  of  these  two  passages  contains  a  quotation  from  the 


10  Rev.  5.  12.  "  Rev.  7.  17. 

'1  Rev.  7.  14.  16  Rev.  6.  16. 

'2  Rev.  22.  3.  "  Rev.  17.  14. 

"Rev.  21.  23.  >8Rev.  i.  7. 

"  Rev.  19.  9.  "  John  19.  34, 


THE  APOCALYPSE  229 

prophet  Zechariah,  and  the  two  agree  in  the  form  of  the 
quotation,  although  it  is  not  the  form  of  the  Septuagint. 

(4)  The  phrases,  "keep  my  word,"  and  "keep  my  say- 
ings" are  found  in  the  fourth  Gospel,  the  First  Epistle,  and 
the  Apocalypse ;  and  nowhere  else  in  the  New  Testament. 20 

We  begin  to  see  that  the  statement  of  Dionysius  that  these 
writings  scarcely  have  a  syllable  in  common  is  far  from 
warranted  by  the  facts.  Any  of  these  titles  and  phrases 
we  have  now  instanced  is  like  that  colored  strand  woven 
into  all  the  cordage  used  by  the  British  government  and 
peculiar  to  it,  so  that  it  can  be  identified  as  government 
property  wherever  it  may  be  found.  These  words  are 
peculiar  to  the  usage  of  John  and  mark  the  books  containing 
them  as  belonging  to  a  common  authorship. 

We  might  give  a  long  list  of  common  phrases  which  are 
not  absolutely  peculiar  to  John,  while  they  are  characteristic 
of  his  usage. 

(5)  The  remarkable  Greek  word  for  "true," aX7]div6g,  is 
found  in  the  Gospel  nine  times,  in  the  epistle  four  times,  and 
in  the  Apocalypse  ten  times ;  and  only  five  times  in  all  the 
other  New  Testament  books. 

(6)  The  thought  of  "overcoming"  is  found  in  the  Johan- 
nine  writings  more  frequently  than  in  any  other  writings 
in  the  New  Testament,  and  it  is  common  to  the  Gospel,  the 
epistle,  and  the  Apocalypse.^i 

(7)  The  word  "witness"  is  a  favorite  with  John.  He 
uses  it  more  frequently  than  any  other  New  Testament 
writer ;  and  this  frequency  of  use  is  as  characteristic  of  the 
Apocalypse  as  of  the  Gospel  and  the  epistle. 

(8)  In  the  Gospel  we  read,  "If  any  man  thirst,  let  him 
come  unto  me  and  drink."22     In  the  Apocalypse  we  find 


20  John  8.  51,  52,  55;  14.  23,  24;  15.  20;  17.  6;  i  John  2.  5;  Rev.  3. 
8,  10;  22.  7,  9. 

"John  16.  33;  I  John  2.  13;  4.  4;  5.  4;  Rev.  2.  7,  11;  3.  5;  12.  ll; 
21.  7. 

»  John  7.  37. 


230  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

the  same  invitation,  "And  he  that  is  athirst  let  him  come: 
he  that  will,  let  him  take  the  water  of  life  freely/'^s 

(9)  Christ  is  the  bridegroom  in  the  Gospel,  and  he  ap- 
pears as  the  bridegroom  again  in  the  Apocalypse.^* 

We  need  not  extend  this  list  farther,  though  it  might  be 
made  much  larger.  The  illustrations  we  have  given  will 
suffice  to  show  that  the  stamp  of  the  Johannine  literature 
can  be  traced  through  the  Apocalypse,  although  the  book 
itself  is  so  strangely  different  from  any  other  of  the  Johan- 
nine books  and  any  other  book  in  the  New  Testament.  We 
grant  that  Dionysius  is  right  in  his  main  contention.  The 
books  are  radically  unlike  in  their  material  of  composition. 
We  believe  that  the  difference  of  subject  is  sufficient  to 
account  for  this,  and  that  with  all  their  differences  there  are 
many  traces  of  a  common  origin  remaining.^^ 

Dionysius  has  a  third  reason  for  his  belief  in  a  difference 
of  authorship  which  is  not  so  easily  disposed  of.    He  says : 

3.  "It  can  be  shown  that  the  diction  of  the  Gospel  and  the 
epistle  differs  from  that  of  the  Apocalypse.  For  they  were 
written  not  only  without  error  as  regards  the  Greek  lan- 
guage, but  also  with  elegance  in  their  expression,  in  their 
reasoning,  and  in  their  entire  structure.  They  are  far 
indeed  from  betraying  any  barbarism  or  solecism,  or  any 
vulgarism  whatever.  For  the  writer  had,  as  it  seems,  both 
the  requisites  of  discourse — that  is,  the  gift  of  knowledge 
and  the  gift  of  expression — as  the  Lord  had  bestowed  them 
both  upon  him.  I  do  not  deny  that  the  other  writer  saw  a 
revelation  and  received  knowledge  and  prophecy.  I  per- 
ceive, however,  that  his  dialect  and  language  are  not  ac- 

23  Rev.  22.  17. 

2^  John  3.  29;  Rev.  19.  7;  21.  2;  22.  17. 

^  The  Tubingen  school  called  the  fourth  Gospel  "a  spiritualized 
Apocalypse,"  in  so  far  acknowledging  a  relationship  between  them. 
Harnack  concludes  that  the  relationship  is  that  of  common  author- 
ship. "I  confess  my  adhesion  to  the  critical  heresy  which  carries  back 
the  Apocalypse  and  the  Gospel  to  a  single  author"  (Chronologie  der 
altchristlichen  Litteratur,  p.  675). 


THE  APOCALYPSE  231 

curate  Greek,  but  that  he  uses  barbarous  idioms,  and,  in 
some  places,  solecisms.  It  is  unnecessary  to  point  these  out 
here,  for  I  would  not  have  any  one  think  that  I  have  said 
these  things  in  a  spirit  of  ridicule,  for  I  have  said  what  I 
have  only  with  the  purpose  of  showing  clearly  the  difference 
between  the  writings."^^ 

It  is  impossible  not  to  admire  the  spirit  in  which  Diony- 
sius  makes  his  criticisms.  He  agrees  that  the  book  is  writ- 
ten by  a  man  whose  name  was  John,  and  that  this  John  was 
a  holy  and  inspired  man.  He  is  led  by  his  study  to  conclude 
that  this  John  was  not  the  apostle  John,  and  his  reasons 
are  given  clearly,  and  they  seem  almost  conclusive  at  first 
glance.  They  were  sufficient  to  satisfy  him ;  and  in  all  prob- 
ability this  last  reason  was  the  climaxing  reason  in  his  mind. 
He  wrote  in  Greek  himself,  and  he  was  so  familiar  with  the 
language  and  its  uses  that  he  could  not  believe  that  one  and 
the  same  man  could  have  written  the  comparatively  faultless 
Greek  of  the  Gospel  and  the  epistle  and  at  the  same  time 
have  been  guilty  of  publishing  to  the  world  the  barbarous 
Greek  of  the  Apocalypse. 

The  Greek  of  the  Apocalypse  is  the  worst  Greek  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  that  is  saying  a  great  deal  for  it. 
Some  of  its  constructions  seem  impossible  and  inexcusable. 
The  nominative  is  put  for  the  accusative  and  the  accusative 
for  the  nominative.2"  There  are  impossible  cases  in  apposi- 
tion. The  author  seems  to  be  anxious  to  get  away  from  the 
oblique  cases  and  back  to  the  nominative  again.  Of  course 
most  of  these  grammatical  blunders  are  obscured  in  the 
English  translation  or  corrected  outright  into  smooth  flow- 
ing constructions ;  but  in  the  Greek  they  stand  as  pure  bar- 
barisms, as  Dionysius  said.  It  also  is  true  that  in  this  re- 
spect the  style  of  the  Apocalypse  is  not  like  that  of  the 
other  writings  of  John. 


^Op.  cit.,  p.  311. 
^Rev.  7.  9;  20.  2. 


232  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Suppose,  as  an  example  of  the  uncouthness  of  the  gram- 
mar in  the  Greek,  we  should  attempt  to  translate  into  some- 
what corresponding  English  the  very  first  sentences  of 
greeting.  They  might  be  fairly  represented  grammatically 
by  the  following:  "John  to  the  seven  churches  in  Asia: 
Grace  to  you  and  peace  from  he  being  and  from  he  was  and 
from  he  coming;  and  from  the  seven  spirits  which  are  be- 
fore his  throne;  and  from  Jesus  Christ,  the  faithfvil  witness 
(a  nominative  in  apposition  with  a  genitive.  We  do  not 
know  how  to  represent  such  a  solecism  in  English),  the  first 
born  of  the  dead,  and  the  ruler  of  the  kings  of  the  earth 
(two  more  nominatives  and  all  in  apposition  with  the  geni- 
tive preceding).  To  the  one  loving  us  (present  participle), 
and  having  loosed  us  (aorist  participle)  from  our  sins  in 
his  blood,  and  to  the  one  he  made  us  a  kingdom  (an  aorist 
indicative  introduced  along  with  the  participial  construc- 
tion), priests  to  God  and  his  Father,  to  him  be  the  glory 
and  the  power  to  the  aeons.    Amen."28 

If  the  John  who  wrote  the  Gospel  and  the  epistles  was, 
as  Dionysius  said,  not  only  without  error  in  his  use  of  the 
Greek  language  but  also  with  elegance  in  his  expression, 
anyone  at  home  in  the  use  of  this  tongue  naturally  would 
raise  the  question  how  it  could  be  possible  for  the  same 
man  to  write  in  such  crudities  and  irregularities  of  style. 
The  author  of  the  other  Johannine  books  writes  in  easy  and 
flowing  style  and  is  observant  of  all  the  rules  of  syntax. 
The  writer  of  the  Apocalypse,  as  it  would  seem  almost 
consciously  and  surely  continually,  bids  defiance  to  all  rules 
of  grammar.  His  genders  and  numbers  and  cases  and  tenses 
are  all  faulty  on  occasion.  How  is  this  difference  to  be 
explained?    We  do  not  know. 

Three  reasons  have  been  suggested  for  the  poor  grammar 
of  the  Apocalypse:  (i)  The  usual  escape  from  the  recog- 
nized difference  in  the  use  of  Greek  in  the  Apocalypse  and 

"Rev.  1.4.5,6. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  233 

in  the  Gospel  and  the  problem  which  it  raised  has  been 
found  in  the  different  dates  of  their  composition.  We  havey/ 
been  told  that  the  Apocalypse  was  written  fifteen,  twenty, 
or  thirty  years  before  the  epistles  or  the  Gospel  and  that 
John  at  that  time  was  not  the  master  of  the  Greek  language 
which  he  became  in  after  years.  In  his  long  residence  in 
Ephesus  he  acquired  much  in  many  ways,  and  it  was  only 
to  be  expected  that  his  knowledge  of  the  Greek  was  being 
improved  all  the  while.  He  wrote  poor  Greek  when  he 
wrote  the  Apocalypse  and  he  wrote  better  Greek  when  he 
composed  the  Gospel  in  later  life.  One  objection  to  this 
explanation  of  the  facts  is  that  critics  are  not  now  disposed 
to  put  so  long  a  period  of  time  between  the  two  books  as 
they  once  were;  and  if  the  passage  of  time  is  the  only  solu- 
tion, that  solution  of  the  problem  fails  when  the  time  be- 
comes too  short  for  the  change  to  take  place.  Another  ob- 
jection is  that  some  of  these  grammatical  blunders  do  not 
seem  to  be  the  result  of  ignorance  so  much  as  the  deliberate 
perpetration  of  one  who  knew  better  grammar,  but  chose 
these  uncouth  forms  to  be  in  harmony  with  some  of  his 
uncouth  visions. 

(2)  Archbishop  Benson  has  written  an  elaborate  defense 
of  the  ungrammatical  grammar  of  the  Apocalypse.  He 
thinks  that  possibly  in  every  instance  the  apocalyptist  had 
a  definite  reason  for  his  departure  from  the  beaten  paths  of 
composition.  When  in  eighteen  passages  he  uses  Zfimoc  with 
the  dative,  that  proves  that  he  knows  how  to  use  it  correctly. 
H,  then,  in  two  instances  we  find  that  he  has  used  o/iotof  with 
the  accusative,  we  have  no  right  to  charge  him  with  igno- 
rance of  the  correct  usage.  We  ought,  rather,  to  inquire 
what  reason  he  has  for  departing  from  the  common  and 
correct  usage  at  these  points.  Zahn  is  very  much  convinced 
of  this  necessity.  He  says,  "When  a  writer  who  uses  a-no 
with  the  genitive  between  thirty  and  forty  times,  writes  once 
anb  0  h)v  Kai  6  ^v  Kai  0  epx^fJ^vog,  it  must  be  because  he  wants 
to  indicate  that  6  wv  ktX.  is  used  as  an  indeclinable  proper 


234  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

name,  as  a  paraphrase  for  Yahweh."^^  This  position  is 
taken  again  and  again  in  Robertson's  new  Grammar  of  New 
Testament  Greek.  Then,  visions  are  apt  to  be  disjointed 
and  illogical;  why  may  not  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse 
have  chosen  this  irregular  grammar  to  preserve  an  impres- 
sion of  the  irregularity  of  the  original  revelation?  There 
may  be  something  in  these  suggestions,  but  how  much  no 
one  ever  will  be  able  to  tell ;  and  it  is  extremely  difficult  to 
apply  the  suggestion  to  the  explanation  of  certain  individual 
cases  in  any  satisfying  manner. 

(3)  Some  have  thought  that  John  employed  different 
amanuenses  and  the  differences  of  style  could  be  accounted 
for  on  that  ground.  One  scribe  wrote  Greek  poorly ;  and 
John  had  the  assistance  of  a  better  man  in  his  further  writ- 
ing. This  is  pure  conjecture.  There  may  be  something  in 
it,  but  no  one  knows.  We  feel  sure  on  other  grounds  that 
the  apostle  John  wrote  both  the  Apocalypse  and  the  other 
Johannine  books,  and  we  simply  refuse  to  be  shaken  in  that 
conviction  by  this  strange  dissimilarity  of  grammar.  The 
proofs  for  common  authorship  are  so  convincing  that  we 
are  willing  to  allow  this  difference  in  the  use  of  the  language 
to  remain  a  mystery  for  which  we  may  offer  some  possible 
explanations,  but  the  key  for  the  solution  of  which  has  been 
lost  with  the  generation  in  which  John  lived. 

We  already  have  pointed  out  the  similarities  of  titles, 
thought,  and  phraseology  which  bind  the  Gospel  and  the 
Apocalypse  together.  It  would  be  equally  easy  to  show  that 
the  underlying  theology  of  the  two  books  is  the  same.  There 
are  differences  in  the  setting  and  emphasis  and  expression 
of  this  theology,  but  they  are  such  differences  as  would  be 
inevitable  in  books  treating  of  such  different  themes  and 
belonging  to  such  different  departments  of  literature. 

The  personality  apparent  in  all  these  Johannine  writings 
is  one  and  the  same.     The  Apocalypse  is  the  book  of  a 


"  Zahn,  Introduction,  vol.  iii,  p.  435. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  235 

Boanerges.  It  seethes  with  fiery  hot  indignation  against 
all  the  enemies  of  the  Christ  and  his  cause.  Are  there  Jews 
in  Smyrna  and  in  Philadelphia  who  have  antagonized  the 
Christian  Church  in  those  cities  ?  What  shall  we  call  them  ? 
They  are  blasphemers  and  liars;  they  are  a  synagogue  of 
Satan,  John  says.^^  Has  the  power  of  the  Roman  empire 
been  prostituted  to  the  persecution  of  the  adherents  of  the 
Christian  faith?  What  shall  we  call  it?  It  is  "Babylon 
THE  Great,  the  Mother  of  the  Harlots  and  of  the 
Abominations  of  the  Earth,"  John  says.^i  Has  the  Ro- 
man emperor  set  up  his  altars  everywhere  and  demanded 
that  he  himself  be  worshiped  as  divine  and  defied  all  other 
religious  powers  to  wage  war  with  him  and  his  followers? 
What  shall  we  call  him?  He  is  no  God,  John  says;  he  is 
a  monster,  a  beast.^^ 

What  will  the  Christ  do  with  these  hostile  powers,  now 
that  he  has  been  exalted  to  the  throne?  Let  the  heavens 
be  opened  and  John  will  show  us  the  King  of  kings  and 
Lord  of  lords,  and  this  is  the  vision  he  sees.  "Out  of  his 
mouth  proceedeth  a  sharp  sword,  that  with  it  he  should 
smite  the  nations :  and  he  shall  rule  them  with  a  rod  of  iron : 
and  he  treadeth  the  winepress  of  the  fierceness  of  the  wrath 
of  God,  the  Almighty."^^  What  will  the  enemies  of  the 
Lord  do  then?  They  will  say  to  the  mountains  and  to  the 
rocks,  "Fall  on  us,  and  hide  us  from  the  face  of  him  that 
sitteth  on  the  throne,  and  from  the  wrath  of  the  Lamb :  for 
the  great  day  of  their  wrath  is  come;  and  who  is  able  to 
stand  ?"^*  Only  a  Boanerges  could  receive  and  transmit  a 
revelation  like  that. 

There  are  numerous  indications  of  the  loving  disciple  and 
saintly  soul  who  delights  in  fellowship  with  the  Father  and 
with  his  Son  above  all  other  things.  That  is  his  conception 
of  eternal  blessedness.    "They  shall  hunger  no  more,  neither 

30  Rev.  2.  9;  3.  9.  23  Rev.  19.  15. 

»iRev.  17.  5.  34  Rev.  6.  16,  17. 

'^Rev.  13.  1-4. 


236  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

thirst  any  more;  for  the  Lamb  that  is  in  the  midst  of  the 
throne  shall  be  their  shepherd,  and  shall  guide  them  unto 
fountains  of  waters  of  life:  and  God  shall  wipe  away  every 
tear  from  their  eyes."^^  "And  I  heard  a  great  voice  out 
of  the  throne  saying,  Behold,  the  tabernacle  of  God  is  with 
men,  and  he  shall  dwell  with  them,  and  they  shall  be  his 
peoples,  and  God  himself  shall  be  with  them,  and  he  their 
God.  .  .  .  He  that  overcometh  shall  inherit  these  things. 
But  for  the  fearful,  and  the  unbelieving,  and  abominable, 
and  murderers,  and  fornicators,  and  sorcerers,  and  idolaters, 
and  all  liars,  their  part  shall  he  in  the  lake  that  burneth  with 
fire  and  brimstone. "^^ 

Therein  is  the  paradox  of  John's  character  apparent.  He 
loves  with  an  intensity  of  affection  which  cannot  brook  any 
antagonism  to  the  object  of  his  regard.  He  is  one  who, 
like  Dante  in  Browning's  description, 

loved  well  because  he  hated, 
Hated  wickedness  that  hinders  loving." 

The  fulfillment  of  his  joy  is  in  fellowship  with  the  Father 
and  with  the  Son.  He  sees  fire  fall  from  heaven  upon 
those  who  refuse  to  love  and  serve  them.^^  This  is  the 
John  of  the  Gospels  and  the  epistles.  He  displays  the  same 
strange  mixture  of  sternness  and  gentleness,  of  hate  and 
love,  of  vehemence  and  diffidence  in  all  these  books. 

We  cannot  believe  that  any  other  John  would  have  these 
characteristics  in  like  measure,  and  would  be  of  such  au- 
thority in  the  early  church  that  he  would  need  no  other 
introduction  and  guarantee  at  the  opening  of  his  book  and 
at  the  close  of  his  visions  than  the  mere  mention  of  his 
name  would  give,  and  then  that  he  would  be  utterly  lost  to 
sight  in  the  subsequent  history !  Yet  that  is  what  the 
deniers  of  the  apostolic  authorship  of  the  Apocalypse  would 
have  us  conclude.     Some  of  them  think  that  an  unknown 


36  Rev.  7.  16,  17.  3'  Browning,  One  Word  More,  v. 

»«  Rev.  21.  3,  7,  8,  38  Rev.  8.  7-1 1. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  237 

John  wrote  the  Apocalypse,  and  some  of  them  think  that 
an  unknown  John  wrote  the  fourth  Gospel,  and  some  others 
think  that  an  unknown  John  wrote  both  the  Gospel  and 
the  Apocalypse;  and  yet,  although  he  thus  proved  himself 
to  be  the  supreme  literary  genius  of  the  first  Christian  cen- 
tury, all  record  and  all  memory  of  him  perished  from 
among  men,  while  the  church  in  some  strange  and  unac- 
countable fashion  came  to  believe  that  his  books  were 
written  by  another  man !    Let  those  believe  that  who  can. 

We  prefer  to  agree  that  the  tradition  of  the  church  is  y^ 
the  best  authority  in  the  matter,  and  that  this  greatest  of 
the  New  Testament  seers  and  theologians  is  that  apostle  of 
the  loving  heart  who  lay  upon  the  Master's  bosom  at  the 
daily  meal  and  came  to  have  the  deepest  insight  into  the 
Master's  mind  during  the  life  ministry,  and  then  was 
granted  the  revelation  of  the  Master's  ultimate  triumph  in 
the  visions  of  the  Patmos  exile.  We  turn  now  to  a  review 
of  the  tradition  of  the  ancient  church  and  the  criticism 
of  the  modern  church  concerning  the  canonicity  and  the 
authorship  of  the  Apocalypse. 

II.     The  External  Evidence 

I.  The  Earliest  Tradition,  (i)  Justin  Martyr  lived  and 
wrote  in  the  earlier  half  of  the  second  century.  He  had 
traveled  extensively.  He  was  a  native  of  Palestine.  He 
had  visited  the  churches  of  Alexandria  and  Rome,  as  well 
as  those  in  Asia  Minor.  He  knew  the  universal  tradition 
of  the  church  in  his  generation.  He  gives  us  his  testimony 
on  the  very  spot  where  the  Johannine  books  were  composed. 
He  believed  what  the  church  in  Ephesus  and  all  the 
churches  of  Asia  Minor  believed  concerning  them.  He  knew 
what  the  African  and  the  European  churches  as  well  as 
those  in  Asia  said  about  the  Apocalypse,  and  he  writes  in 
so  many  words,  "There  was  a  certain  man  with  us,  whose 
name  was  John,  one  of  the  apostles  of  Christ,  who  proph- 


238  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

esied,  by  a  revelation  that  was  made  to  him,  that  those 
who  beHeved  in  our  Christ  would  dwell  a  thousand  years  in 
Jerusalem. "^^  The  reference  is  to  Rev.  20.  4,  and  the  state- 
ment could  not  be  more  explicit  that  this  book  was  written 
by  John  the  apostle,  and  no  more  authoritative  witness 
could  be  cited  from  this  period.  Such  definite  testimony 
from  such  a  source  ought  to  be  as  unquestioned  as  it  is  un- 
questionable. 

(2)  Melito  was  bishop  of  the  church  in  Sardis  about 
A.  D.  170,  and  he  wrote  a  commentary  on  the  Apocalypse 
of  John.  Sardis  was  the  site  of  one  of  the  churches  ad- 
dressed in  the  epistles  of  the  opening  chapters  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse. The  tradition  here  would  be  likely  to  be  an  un- 
broken and  an  authoritative  one. 

(3)Theophilus  of  Antioch  and  Apollonius  of  Ephesus, 
also  before  the  close  of  the  second  century,  quote  from  the 
Apocalypse  as  the  writing  of  John.  All  these  witnesses  are 
from  Asia  Minor  where  the  Apocalypse  was  composed, 
and  where  the  tradition  concerning  it  would  be  most  likely 
to  be  reliable. 

(4)  Irenaeus  was  a  disciple  of  Polycarp,  who  was  a 
disciple  of  the  apostle  John.  Irenaeus  himself  came  from 
Asia  Minor  and  was  bishop  of  the  church  in  Lyons  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  second  century.  He  speaks  of  the  "most 
approved  and  ancient  copies"  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  he 
appeals  to  the  testimony  of  "those  men  who  saw  John  face 
to  face"  concerning  its  text.^*'  We  know  that  Irenseus 
meant  John  the  apostle  in  this  reference  because  he  tells  us 
explicitly  in  another  passage  that  John  could  not  endure 
the  sight  of  some  of  the  Apocalyptic  revelation,  "and  the 
Word  revived  him,  and  reminded  him  that  it  was  He  upon 
whose  bosom  he  had  leaned  at  supper,  when  he  put  the 
question  as  to  who  should  betray  Him,  declaring,  I  am  the 

39  Dialogue  with  Trypho,  ch,  81.  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  i, 
p.  240. 

*"  Ag.  Heresies,  V,  30.  i;  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  i,  p.  558. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  239 

first  and  the  last,  and  He  who  Hveth,  and  was  dead,  and 
behold  I  am  alive  for  evermore,  and  have  the  keys  of  death 
and  of  hell,  i.  17,  i8."^i 

(5)  Tertullian  was  the  great  leader  in  the  African 
church  in  this  period,  and  in  his  writings  we  find  such  ex- 
plicit statements  as  these,  "The  apostle  John,  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse, describes  a  sword  which  proceeded  from  the  mouth 
of  God,"^2  and  "The  apostle  John  beheld  a  city  in  heaven."*^ 

(6)  Clement  of  Alexandria  was  a  contemporary  of  Ter- 
tullian and  Irenaeus  and  he  cites  the  Apocalypse  of  John  as 
sacred  and  authoritative  Scripture,  even  as  they  did. 

(7)  Origen,  who  succeeded  Clement  as  the  head  of  the 
catechetical  school  at  Alexandria  and  became  the  greatest 
of  all  the  church  Fathers  in  saintly  life  and  preeminent 
scholarship,  is  as  clear  in  his  conviction  as  any  who  had 
preceded  him.  He  says,  "John,  son  of  Zebedee,  says  in  his 
Apocalypse,  And  I  saw  an  angel  flying  in  the  midst  of 
heaven  having  the  Eternal  Gospel,  to  preach  it  to  those  who 
dwell  upon  the  earth,  14.  6,  7."^^ 

(8) The  Muratorian  Canon,  A,  D.  170,  says,  "John,  too, 
in  the  Apocalypse,  although  he  writes  only  to  seven 
churches,  yet  addresses  all."  The  John  who  wrote  the 
Apocalypse  is  not  distinguished  in  any  way  from  the  author 
of  the  Gospel  and  the  epistle,  and  the  failure  to  distinguish 
is  probably  an  identification.  It  would  seem  that  the  writer 
of  this  Fragment  believed  that  one  John,  the  apostle,  wrote 
all  these  books. 

(9)  Hippolytus,  A.  D.  200-240,  wrote  an  elaborate  de- 
fense of  the  Apocalypse  against  its  chief  critic  in  his  day, 
and  his  book  seems  to  have  established  the  apostolic  and 
canonical  authority  of  the  Apocalypse  in  all  the  Western 
church  for  the  succeeding  centuries. 


^'  Op.  ciL,  iv,  20.  11;  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  i,  p.  491. 

^2  Ag.  Marcion,  III,  14;  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  iii,  p.  333. 

*3  Op.  cit.,  iii,  25;  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  p.  342. 

^  Commentary  on  John,  I,  14;  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  ix,  p.  305. 


240  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

There  are  few  books  in  the  New  Testament  which  are 
as  well  attested  and  as  widely  acknowledged  in  the  second 
Christian  century  as  is  the  Apocalypse  of  John ;  and  the 
Tubingen  School  is  right  in  declaring  that  iis  apostolic 
authorship  is  as  well  guaranteed  as  that  of  any  book  in  the 
New  Testament  canon  in  all  the  writings  of  Christian 
aniiquity.  Samuel  Davidson  said :  "The  apostolic  origin 
of  the  Apocalypse  is  as  well  attested  as  that  of  any  book  in 
the  New  Testament.  How  can  it  be  proved  that  Paul  wrote 
the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  for  example,  on  the  basis  of 
external  evidence,  if  it  be  denied  that  the  apostle  John 
wrote  the  closing  book  of  the  canon?  With  the  limited 
stock  of  early  ecclesiastical  literature  that  survives  the 
wreck  of  time,  we  should  despair  of  proving  the  authen- 
ticity of  any  New  Testament  book  if  that  of  the  Apoca- 
laypse  be  rejected."^^  However,  there  were  a  few  who 
denied  the  authority  of  the  apostle,  and  we  notice  these  at 
this  point. 

2.  The  First  Opponents.  ( i )  Epiphanius  mentions  some 
people  whom  he  calls  the  Alogi,  who  declared  that  the 
fourth  Gospel  and  the  Apocalypse  were  to  be  rejected  from 
the  canon  of  Scripture  because  they  were  written  not  by 
the  apostle  John  but  by  his  enemy  and  the  enemy  of  the 
truth  he  taught,  Cerinthus,  the  arch-heretic  of  Ephesus ! 
The  perversity  of  this  view  is  equal  to  that  of  Thomas 
Paine's  indictment  of  George  Washington  when  he  declared 
that  Washington's  military  blunders  had  nearly  ruined  the 
country  and  that  posterity  always  would  be  in  doubt  as 
to  whether  Washington  was  more  of  a  fool  or  a  knave. 
The  character  of  Washington  never  was  injured  by  such 
criticism.  If  Cerinthus  wrote  the  Johannine  books,  then 
we  can  believe  that  Thomas  Paine  was  a  greater  patriot 
than  George  Washington;  but  until  the  one  absurdity  is 
proven  we  will  refuse  credence  to  the  other.  Nobody 
knows  anything  about  these  Alogi.    They  are  merely  men- 

*6  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  New  Testament,  vol.  i,  p.  345. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  241 

tioned  by  Epiphanius  and  he  tells  us  nothing  of  their  num- 
bers or  their  standing  in  the  church.  They  possibly  were 
a  mere  handful  of  folk,  capable  of  any  perversity  of  faith. 
They  do  not  seem  to  have  had  any  influence  or  following  in 
the  next  generation. 

(2)  Caius,  a  presbyter  at  Rome,  did  not  belong  to  the 
Alogi,  but  he  adopted  their  view  of  the  authorship  of  the 
Apocalypse,  and  he  used  some  of  their  arguments  against 
the  book.  It  was  in  answer  to  him  that  Hippolytus  wrote 
the  defense  of  the  Apocalypse  which  established  its  stand- 
ing in  the  Western  church. 

(3)  We  already  have  mentioned  Dionysius  of  Alex- 
andria and  his  objections  to  the  apostolic  authorship  of  the 
Apocalypse  drawn  from  the  internal  characteristics  of  the 
book.  We  have  answered  his  objections  in  a  manner  satis- 
factory to  ourselves.  At  the  same  time  we  acknowledged 
that  the  criticism  of  Dionysius  was  both  courteous  and 
scholarly;  and  we  felt  sure  that  Dionysius  himself  was  a 
most  worthy  and  honest  man.  His  reasoning  seems  to  have 
influenced  much  of  the  later  thought  in  the  East. 

(4)  Eusebius  evidently  is  uncertain  whether  to  say  that 
the  Apocalypse  was  written  by  the  apostle  John  or  by  the 
presbyter  John,  and  he  is  just  as  undecided  whether  to  class 
the  book  among  the  Accepted  or  among  the  Rejected  claim- 
ants to  a  place  in  the  New  Testament  canon.'*^ 

(5)  A  little  later  Cyril  of  Jerusalem  omitted  the  Apoca- 
lypse from  his  list  of  canonical. books.  The  canon  of  the 
Synod  of  Laodicea,  A.  D.  363,  did  not  give  it  a  place.  It 
is  not  found  in  the  canon  of  the  Apostolic  Constitutions. 
Gregory  of  Nazianzus  omitted  it  from  his  canon ;  and  it  is 
not  found  in  the  Synopsis  of  Chrysostom. 

(6)  The  school  at  Antioch  does  not  seem  to  have  favored 
the  use  of  the  Apocalypse.  Neither  Theodore  nor  Chrysos- 
tom nor  Theodoret  quotes  it  in  his  writings,  and  it  is  known 
that  Theodoret  rejected  it. 

*^  Church  History,  iii,  39;  iii,  25.  4. 


242  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

(7)  Amphilochius  of  Iconlum,  who  died  about  A.  D. 
395,  says  that  the  majority  of  men  in  his  day  beUeved  that 
the  Apocalypse  was  spurious;  and  even  as  late  as  the 
beginning  of  the  ninth  century  Nicephorus  ranks  the  Apoca- 
lypse of  John  along  with  the  Apocalypse  of  Peter  among 
the  books  which  are  spoken  against  and  doubtful  as  to  their 
canonicity. 

(8)  The  Jacobite  church  rejected  it.  The  Nestorian 
church  refused  it.  It  was  not  in  ecclesiastical  use  in  any 
of  the  Syrian  churches  for  the  first  four  centuries.  It 
did  not  have  any  place  in  the  Syrian  New  Testament,  the 
Peshito,  in  this  period. 

(9)  The  first  commentary  on  the  Apocalypse  in  the 
Eastern  church  was  written  by  Andreas  in  the  fifth  cen- 
tury; and  the  second  was  written  by  Arethas  in  the  ninth 
century.  In  all  probability  the  Apocalypse  was  written  in 
Asia  Minor  and  received  there  from  the  first,  and  from 
Asia  Minor  it  was  carried  westward  to  Africa  and  to 
Europe ;  but  it  does  not  seem  to  have  penetrated  the  farther 
East,  and  for  some  centuries  it  was  comparatively  unknown 
in  the  churches  of  those  regions.  The  Eastern  church  was 
disposed  to  refuse  recognition  to  the  Apocalypse  in  the 
beginning;  but  the  Western  church  came  to  an  established 
faith  in  its  apostolicity  and  canonicity,  and  in  due  time  the 
Eastern  church  received  it  into  its  canon.  The  Apocalypse 
held  an  undisputed  place  in  the  Bible  through  the  Middle 
Ages  and  until  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  Then  doubts 
concerning  it  were  expressed  again. 

3.  At  the  Reformation.  ( i )  Carlstadt  divided  the  books 
of  the  New  Testament  into  three  classes  of  different  degrees 
of  authority,  and  he  put  seven  books  into  the  third  or  least 
authoritative  class,  and  he  put  the  Apocalypse  at  the  very 
end  of  these,  as  the  least  worthy  book  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment and  almost  liable  to  exclusion  altogether.  (2)  Luther 
practically  excluded  the  Apocalypse  from  his  Bible.  He 
translated  it,  but  put  it  into  the  appendix  as  one  of  the  non- 


THE  APOCALYPSE  243 

canonical  and  apocryphal  books.  "My  spirit  cannot  adapt 
itself  to  the  book,"  he  said.  In  his  Preface  to  the  New 
Testament,  1522,  he  declared  that  to  him  the  Apocalypse 
had  every  mark  of  being  neither  apostolic  nor  prophetic. 
The  apostles  spoke  clearly,  without  figure  or  vision,  of 
Christ  and  his  deeds ;  and  no  prophet  deals  so  entirely  with 
visions  and  figures.  It  did  not  seem  to  be  the  work  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  He  did  not  like  the  commands  and  threats 
which  the  writer  makes  about  his  book,  and  the  promise 
of  blessedness  to  those  who  keep  what  was  written  in  it, 
when  no  one  knows  what  that  is,  to  say  nothing  of  keeping 
it,  and  there  are  many  nobler  books  to  be  kept.^*^ 

(3)  Zwingli  thought  that  the  Apocalypse  was  a  non- 
biblical  book,  written  by  some  other  John  than  the  apostle. 

(4)  Calvin  did  not  write  any  commentaries  on  Second 
and  Third  John  and  the  Apocalypse.  However,  he  used 
the  Apocalypse  in  quotation  as  apostolic  and  canonical. 

(5)  Melanchthon  had  no  question  about  the  book.  Beza 
defended  it  against  all  criticism.  Bullinger  answered  all 
the  objections  of  Luther  concerning  it.  So  the  scholars 
and  leaders  of  the  Reformation  had  different  judgments 
about  the  Apocalypse;  and  although  at  the  very  beginning 
Erasmus  and  Luther  and  Zwingli  turned  the  tide  against  it, 
it  was  not  long  until  the  church  had  restored  the  book  to 
its  place  in  the  canon  and  in  the  regard  and  the  affection 
of  its  membership. 

4.  In  Later  Times.  Herder  and  Eichhorn  led  the  church 
into  a  much  fuller  appreciation  of  the  literary  value  of  the 
Apocalypse.  At  the  beginning  of  the  last  century  Schleier- 
macher  and  his  school  renewed  the  assault  upon  the  book. 
In  the  middle  of  the  century  the  Tubingen  School  warmly 
defended  its  authenticity.  Through  the  whole  century  of 
historical  criticism  just  past  there  have  been  advocates  of 
all  the  old  views  concerning  it.  The  final  outcome,  how- 
ever, seems  to  be  manifest  in  a  tendency  to  recognize  the 

*'  Summary  in  Hastings's  Bible  Dictionary,  vol.  iv,  p.  241. 


244  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

unusual  weight  of  testimony  in  its  favor  in  the  second 
century  and,  in  a  fuller  appreciation  of  the  nature  of  the 
literature  it  represents,  to  find  an  explanation  of  many  of 
the  difficulties  felt  by  the  older  scholars  concerning  it.  The 
Johannine  authorship  is  ably  maintained  by  scholars  differ- 
ing so  widely  from  each  other  as  E.  A.  Abbott,  C.  A.  Scott, 
W.  H.  Simcox,  V.  H.  Stanton,  Bernhard  Weiss,  and  Theo- 
dore Zahn.  Origen,  Hippolytus,  the  Muratorian  Canon, 
Irenaeus,  Clement  of  Alexandria,  and  Tertullian  cite  the 
Gospel,  the  epistles,  and  the  Apocalypse  as  the  work  of  one 
person,  John ;  and  we  have  now  seen  reason  for  concluding 
that  the  apostle  John  is  the  author  of  all  these  books.  Those 
who  attack  the  Johannine  and  apostolic  authorship  of  any 
one  of  them  must  give  good  reason  for  setting  aside  these 
chief  authorities  in  the  field  of  original  patristic  evidence. 
These  names  are  sufficient  to  settle  the  question  as  to  the 
Johannine  authorship  of  all  the  Johannine  books. 

The  Apocalypse  probably  is  more  firmly  grounded  in  the 
respect  of  the  general  church  to-day  than  it  ever  has  been 
since  the  first  half  of  the  second  century.  It  doubtless  will 
hold  its  own  henceforth  against  all  hostile  criticism.  It  is 
a  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ,  a  strange,  elusive,  alluring 
revelation.  As  the  successive  centuries  unfold  its  mysteries 
and  as  its  interpretation  becomes  more  and  more  clear  it 
will  be  increasingly  prized  by  the  increasingly  appreciative 
church.  There  has  been  almost  as  much  disputing  about 
the  date  of  the  writing  of  the  Apocalypse  as  there  has  been 
about  its  authorship.  We  will  summarize  the  facts  as 
briefly  as  possible. 

III.    The  Date 

I.  In  the  case  of  the  Apocalypse  many  modern  scholars 
both  of  the  ultra-critical  and  the  more  conservative  school 
have  been  disposed  to  date  the  book  much  earlier  than 
church  tradition  does.  The  same  critics  who  would  put 
the  composition  of  the  fourth  Gospel  toward  the  end  of 


THE  APOCALYPSE  245 

the  second  century,  a  whole  century  later  than  church  tradi- 
tion placed  it  in  ascribing  it  to  the  apostle  John,  when  they 
came  to  dating  the  Apocalypse  decided  that  it  must  have 
been  written  not  at  the  end  of  the  first  century,  as  church 
tradition  declared,  but  at  least  a  whole  generation  earlier 
than  that.  The  internal  evidence  was  of  such  a  character 
as  to  lead  many  conservative  scholars  to  agree  with  them 
in  fixing  upon  this  earlier  date.  This  case  probably  is 
unique  in  the  field  of  New  Testament  criticism.  In  the 
case  of  every  other  book  if  the  traditionary  date  was  not 
accepted,  the  tendency  always  has  been  to  bring  it  down 
to  some  later  time. 

2.  The  external  evidence  for  the  late  date  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse is  stronger  than  for  any  other  book  in  the  New 
Testament.  Irenseus,  in  speaking  of  the  Apocalypse,  says, 
"It  was  seen  not  long  ago,  but  almost  in  our  own  genera- 
tion, at  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Domitian."^^  Eusebius 
declares,  "At  that  time  the  apostle  and  evangelist  John,  the 
one  whom  Jesus  loved,  was  still  living  in  Asia,  and  govern- 
ing the  churches  of  that  region,  having  returned  after  the 
death  of  Domitian  from  his  exile  on  the  island. "^^  Vic- 
torinus  agrees  in  the  same  testimony,  "When  John  saw 
these  things  he  was  in  the  island  of  Patmos,  having  been 
condemned  to  the  mines  by  the  emperor  Domitian. "^^  He 
repeats  this  testimony  in  other  passages. 

Jerome  closes  his  account  of  the  apostle  John  with  these 
words :  "Domitian  having  raised  a  second  persecution,  he 
was  banished  to  the  isle  of  Patmos,  and  wrote  the  Apoca- 
lypse, on  which  Justin  Martyr  and  Irengeus  afterward  wrote 
commentaries.  But  Domitian  having  been  put  to  death,  and 
his  acts,  on  account  of  his  excessive  cruelty,  having  been 
annulled  by  the  Senate,  he  returned  to  Ephesus  under  Perti- 


^8  Quoted  by  Eusebius,  op.  cit.,  iii,  18.  3;  Nicenc  and  Post-Nicene 
Fathers,  vol.  i,  p.  148. 

'^  Op.  cit.,  iii,  23.  i;  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  i,  p.  150. 
6"  In  Apoc.,  X,  II. 


246  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

nax,  and  continuing  there  until  the  time  of  the  emperor 
Trajan,  founded  and  built  churches  throughout  all  Asia, 
and,  worn  out  by  old  age,  died  in  the  sixty-eighth  year 
after  our  Lord's  passion  and  was  buried  near  the  same 
city."^^  Here  are  the  ancient  authorities.  No  one  contra- 
dicts them  in  the  first  three  centuries  of  church  history. 
They  all  agree  that  the  Apocalypse  was  written  during  the 
reign  of  Domitian,  some  time  in  the  last  decade  of  the 
first  century.  Can  there  be  any  good  reason  for  contra- 
dicting a  tradition  guaranteed  by  such  names  and  by  such 
unanimity?  The  cavalier  method  in  which  some  modern 
writers  set  it  aside  seems  to  argue  its  unfitness  to  agree 
with  their  theories  rather  than  its  own  untrustworthiness. 

3.  The  following  authorities  thought  that  the  Apocalypse 
was  written  in  or  about  the  reign  of  Nero,  A.  D.  65-69: 
Credner,  Ewald,  Hase,  Reuss,  Baur,  Hilgenfeld,  Wieseler, 
Beyschlag,  Lange,  Stuart,  Selwyn,  Farrar,  Lightfoot, 
Westcott,  Hort,  and  Henderson. 

4.  The  following  authorities  date  the  composition  of  the 
Apocalypse  about  the  year  A.  D.  70,  or  in  the  beginning 
of  the  reign  of  Vespasian :  Eichhorn,  Liicke,  Bleek,  Diister- 
dieck,  Weiss,  Mommsen,  Bartlet. 

5.  The  present  tendency  is  to  go  back  to  the  date  set 
by  Irenaeus  and  the  other  church  Fathers,  somewhere  be- 
tween A.  D.  90  and  96,  in  the  reign  of  Domitian.  This 
was  the  view  of  Elliott,  Ebrard,  Hengstenberg,  Hofmann, 
Godet,  Lee,  Milligan,  Warfield,  Abbott,  Arnold,  Cornely, 
Adeney,  Belser,  Bousset,  Forbes,  Gloag,  Green,  Havet, 
Hug,  Jiilicher,  Kreyenbiihl,  McGiffert,  Mill,  Neumann, 
Peake,  Ramsay,  Reville,  Salmon,  Schafer,  Von  Dobschutz, 
Von  Soden,  Weizsacker,  Wellhausen,  Wernle,  Zahn,  David- 
son, Alford,  and  Trench.  It  is  the  view  of  Harnack  and 
Bacon.  It  is  the  conclusion  of  Porter  in  the  article  on  the 
Apocalypse  in  Hastings's  Bible  Dictionary.     It  is  the  date 

"  Lives  of  Illustrious  Men,  ch.  9;  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers, 
vol.   iii,  pp.  364,  365. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  247 

favored  by  Swete  in  the  latest  critical  commentary  on  the 
book. 

If  we  agree  upon  this  date  as  the  only  one  supported  by 
ancient  authority  and  satisfying  all  the  demands  of  the 
most  exacting  modern  criticism,  it  leaves  the  problem  of 
the  differences  of  grammar  and  Greek  in  the  writing  of 
the  Gospel  and  of  the  Apocalypse  looming  large  on  our 
hands ;  for  these  two  books  must  then  have  been  written 
within  a  short  period  of  time.  They  both  must  belong  to 
the  last  decade  of  the  century,  and  any  difference  in  vocabu- 
lary, grammar,  doctrine,  spirit,  or  form  cannot  be  accounted 
for  by  any  lapse  of  time  between  the  two.  It  must  be  due 
either  to  a  different  amanuensis  or  to  the  inherent  difference 
in  the  class  of  literature  represented  by  the  two  books.  The 
Gospel  is  a  biography  and  history.  The  book  of  Revelation 
is  an  Apocalypse.  The  prophetic  literature  of  the  Jews  is 
unique  in  the  literature  of  the  nations.  The  apocalyptic 
literature  is  the  lineal  successor  of  the  Old  Testament 
prophetic  literature,  and  it  in  turn  is  unique,  with  charac- 
teristics distinguishing  it  from  the  prophets  and  from  all 
other  literature  in  the  world. 

It  is  but  recently  that  the  fact  has  been  recognized  that 
the  Apocalypse  of  John  belongs  to  a  class  of  literature 
and  does  not  stand  alone  in  its  period  of  world  history  as 
it  does  in  our  New  Testament.  There  are  a  number  of 
other  Apocalypses  in  existence  in  whole  or  in  part  which 
belong  to  the  same  period  of  development  in  Hebrew  his- 
tory, and  the  study  of  these  has  been  very  helpful  in  the 
understanding  and  interpretation  of  our  New  Testament 
book. 

IV.     General  Characteristics  of  the  Apocalyptical 
Literature 

There  are  Christian  Apocalypses  belonging  to  a  later 
period  than  that  of  John  and  modeled  largely  upon  his 


248  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

work.  We  are  not  interested  so  much  in  these  at  present, 
but,  rather,  in  those  Jewish  Apocalypses  which  preceded 
him  or  belonged  to  the  same  period  with  him  and  with 
which  he  must  have  been  acquainted  when  he  wrote  his 
book.  The  Jewish  Apocalypses  have  several  characteristics 
in  common,  and  we  will  specify  a  few  of  them. 

1.  They  all  belong  to  the  period  of  persecution  and  na- 
tional depression.  They  have  been  called  Tracts  for  Bad 
Times.  The  enemies  of  the  Lord  for  the  time  being  seem 
triumphant.  The  voice  of  prophecy  is  dumb.  No  man 
stands  forth  to  proclaim  in  public  the  will  of  the  Lord.  No 
authorized  messenger  declares,  "Thus  saith  Jehovah."  In 
some  secluded  corner  a  scribe  meditates  upon  the  evil  times 
and  the  mysteries  of  Divine  Providence  and  the  problems 
of  unfulfilled  prophecy;  and  to  him  visions  of  a  brighter 
future  are  granted.  He  is  given  to  see  that  though  the 
present  may  be  dark  enough,  the  future  holds  ultimate 
triumph  in  store.  It  may  not  come  very  soon,  and  it  may 
not  come  in  this  world ;  but  in  the  world  which  is  to  follow 
this  the  righteous  will  find  their  adequate  reward  and  the 
wicked  will  be  overthrown.  There  will  be  a  new  heaven 
and  a  new  earth  and  a  new  and  blessed  consummation  of 
things. 

This  assurance  was  given  to  faith,  but  it  was  given  in 
visions,  and  symbols,  and  dreams.  Dreams  come  only  in 
dark  days  or  at  night.  Apocalypses  belong  only  to  troubled 
times.  Symbols  are  employed  only  when  clear  speech  has 
failed.  When  the  prophet  has  ceased  to  speak,  the  apoca- 
lyptist  begins  to  write.  He  works  upon  the  basis  which 
prophetic  material  has  furnished  him,  and  he  remolds  it 
into  grotesque  and  curious  forms.  He  must  have  been 
conscious  that  there  was  a  difference  in  the  degree  of  his 
inspiration,  for  he  never  publishes  his  visions  under  his 
own  name  or  claims  for  them  his  personal  authority,  as 
the  prophets  did. 

2.  Pseudonymous  Authorship.    It  is  a  strange  fact  that 


THE  APOCALYPSE  249 

all  of  these  Jewish  Apocalypses,  written  after  the  age  of 
the  prophets  in  Israel,  take  shelter  behind  some  one  of  the 
great  names  of  Jewish  antiquity,  Enoch,  Moses,  Isaiah, 
Baruch,  or  Ezra,  and  thus  conceal  the  real  author's  name. 
We  know  nothing  at  all  about  the  authors  of  any  of 
them  to-day.  We  can  decide  approximately  the  date  of 
their  composition,  and  we  know  that  they  all  have  been 
written  in  the  later  age  of  Jewish  history;  but  we  find  the 
names  of  older  heroes  and  leaders  and  saints  attached  to 
them  and  they  purport  to  give  the  revelations  and  the 
visions  granted  to  these.  They  are  all  works  of  fiction  to 
that  extent. 

The  reason  for  this  pseudonymous  authorship  may  be 
found  in  the  fact  that  it  might  have  been  dangerous  to  the 
life  or  the  liberty  of  the  writer  of  any  one  of  these  half- 
political  pamphlets  if  he  became  known  to  the  authorities. 
The  Apocalypses  all  foretold  calamity  to  the  world  powers. 
They  all  predicted  a  coming  catastrophe  and  revolution. 
They  proclaimed  the  overthrow  of  the  present  order  of 
things.  They  antagonized  the  heathen  religions  and  the 
heathen  regimes.  It  probably  was  the  part  of  prudence 
for  the  author  to  hide  his  own  personality. 

Without  doubt  too  the  later  writers  felt  that  they  were 
in  line  with  the  spirit  and  the  teachings  of  the  older 
worthies  whose  names  they  chose  to  give  authority  to  their 
books.  If  these  revelations  were  not  given  actually  to  these 
men,  they  would  have  sanctioned  them  in  both  their  purpose 
and  their  content  if  they  had  been  alive  when  these  books 
were  composed.  We  are  assured  by  the  writers  on  the 
subject  that  this  assumption  of  an  ancient  name  by  a  con- 
temporary writer  was  a  common  literary  device  at  this 
time,  and  that  there  was  not  the  same  sense  of  literary 
proprietorship  then  that  we  have  now,  and  that  this  custom 
was  considered  legitimate  and  thoroughly  consistent  with 
honesty  and  the  highest  moral  ideals.  It  is  difficult  for  us 
to  conceive  this;  but  it  is  true  that  the  standards  in  the 


250  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

ancient  times  were  different  from  those  to  which  we  are 
accustomed.  These  Apocalypses  evidently  were  written  by 
religious  men  for  religious  purposes,  and  nevertheless  under 
assumed  names. 

3.  The  purpose  of  writing  seems  to  have  been  the  same 
in  all  the  books  of  this  class  of  literature.  Encouragement 
under  trial  and  persecution,  and  exhortation  to  patience 
in  the  present  distress — these  are  the  two  burdens  in  them 
all ;  and  both  encouragement  and  exhortation  are  based 
upon  predictions  of  the  coming  crisis  and  the  ultimate 
triumph  of  Jehovah  in  behalf  of  his  people. 

4.  The  form  in  which  these  predictions  are  clothed  is 
practically  the  same  in  all  the  Apocalypses.  Visions  and 
dreams  are  vouchsafed  to  the  writer  and  these  visions  have 
all  the  grotesqueness  and  the  irregularity  of  our  own  inven- 
tions in  troubled  sleep.  The  unexpected  always  is  happen- 
ing. The  most  surprising  and  sudden  changes  take  place. 
Unnatural  and  impossible  combinations  of  incidents  and 
things  occur.  We  could  make  nothing  out  of  them,  if  they 
were  not  interpreted  for  us.  In  the  Apocalypses  an  angel 
furnishes  the  interpretation  and  these  strange  and  mysteri- 
ous and  kaleidoscopic  pictures  are  found  to  be  S)'^mbols 
of  present  and  future  events. 

5.  The  material  of  which  these  apocalyptic  symbols  are 
composed  is  in  large  measure  common  to  all.  Hideous 
creatures,  whose  appearance  is  distressing  to  the  artistic 
mind  and  whose  only  excuse  for  being  is  that  they  are 
the  creations  of  a  dream,  represent  the  world  kingdoms. 
The  successive  kings  in  a  nation  or  in  a  dynasty  are  the 
many  heads  of  a  beast.  Certain  numbers  stand  for  indi- 
viduals or  for  conventional  periods  or  for  the  antichrist. 
There  are  theophanies  and  wars  and  dragons  and  descrip- 
tions of  heaven  and  hell.  It  is  surprising  to  find  how  much 
these  books  resemble  each  other  in  their  constituent  and 
conventional  framework  and  composition.  They  rest  upon 
the  same  portions  of  the  Old  Testament  as  the  sources  of 


THE  APOCALYPSE  251 

their  inspiration,  and  the  originality  of  each  writer  is  appar- 
ent only  in  the  differences  of  combination  in  this  material. 

6.  It  has  been  thought  that  some  distinctive  doctrines 
might  be  predicated  of  these  Apocalypses,  (i)  Their  con- 
ception of  God  seems  to  be  more  transcendent  than  that 
of  the  Old  Testament.  The  God  of  the  Apocalypses  is 
more  sharply  distinguished  from  the  ruler  of  this  world 
darkness.  The  separation  is  almost  dualistic  in  its  com- 
pleteness. God  stands  outside  and  above  the  present  world- 
order,  and  he  is  about  to  intervene  to  set  it  right  and 
vindicate  his  power  and  establish  his  own  authority. 

(2)  In  the  Apocalypses  there  is  a  wider  world-view  than 
is  common  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  kingdom  of  God 
is  no  longer  the  kingdom  of  Israel  alone ;  it  is  extended 
to  include  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world. 

(3)  The  eschatology  of  the  Apocalypses  is  much  more 
definite  than  that  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  hope  of 
immortality  shines  only  dimly  in  the  pages  of  the  older 
book ;  but  it  comes  out  into  the  clear  light  in  the  apocalyptic 
literature.  The  general  scheme  of  the  last  things  appears 
to  be  the  same  in  all  of  them.  There  is  to  be  a  final  assault 
of  the  powers  of  evil  upon  the  righteous  and  their  King, 
but  they  are  to  be  completely  vanquished.  Some  great  crisis 
is  at  hand,  but  out  of  its  culmination  of  catastrophe  for 
the  wicked  a  new  order  of  things  will  arise.  There  will 
be  a  Judgment  Day,  and  the  good  will  be  gathered  from 
out  their  great  tribulation  to  their  eternal  blessedness  in 
the  presence  of  Jehovah,  their  glorious  King. 

These  six  things  seem  to  be  true  of  all  of  the  Jewish 
Apocalypses.  They  are  all  of  pseudonymous  authorship. 
They  spring  out  of  similar  circumstances.  They  have  a 
like  purpose.  They  have  much  the  same  form  and  much 
of  the  same  material.  They  represent  the  same  general 
type  of  doctrines.  It  may  be  worth  our  while  to  glance  at 
a  few  of  these  Apocalypses  which  preceded  the  publication 
of  the  Apocalypse  of  John, 


252  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

V.    The  Jewish  Apocalypses 

All  of  these  have  come  to  us  through  Christian  hands, 
and  some  of  them  have  been  revised  rather  radically  for 
the  use  and  the  reading  of  Christians.  Some  have  been 
changed  more  than  others,  and  sometimes  it  is  difficult 
to  determine  how  much  of  a  book  is  Jewish  and  how  much 
of  it  is  due  to  Christian  editors  and  revisers. 

I.  The  Book  of  Enoch.  This  book  seems  to  have  been 
esteemed  very  highly  by  both  the  Jews  and  the  Christians 
of  the  first  century.  It  is  quoted  by  name  in  the  Epistle  of 
Jude  in  our  New  Testament,  and  by  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas 
which  belongs  to  the  apostolic  age.  Tertullian  thought  it 
was  an  inspired  book.  He  says,  "These  things  the  Holy 
Spirit,  foreseeing  from  the  beginning  the  entrance  of  super- 
stition, foretold  by  the  mouth  of  Enoch."  Irenaeus  refers 
to  it  as  an  authority.  Clement  of  Alexandria  and  Origen 
knew  it,  and  refer  to  it  in  their  writings.  The  Jews  were 
the  first  to  decide  that  the  book  was  not  authoritative,  and 
the  Christians  came  more  slowly  to  the  same  conclusion. 

Augustine  says :  "There  is  some  truth  in  these  apocryphal 
writings,  but  they  contain  so  many  false  statements  that 
they  have  no  canonical  authority.  We  cannot  deny  that 
Enoch,  the  seventh  from  Adam,  left  some  divine  writings, 
for  this  is  asserted  by  the  apostle  Jude  in  his  canonical 
epistle.  But  it  is  not  without  reason  that  these  writings 
have  no  place  in  that  canon  of  Scripture  which  was  pre- 
served in  the  temple  of  the  Hebrew  people  by  the  diligence 
of  successive  priests;  for  their  antiquity  brought  them 
under  suspicion,  and  it  was  impossible  to  ascertain  whether 
these  were  his  genuine  writings,  and  they  were  not  brought 
forward  as  genuine  by  the  persons  who  were  found  to  have 
carefully  preserved  the  canonical  books  by  a  successive 
transmission."^^      Augustine    evidently    is    misled    by    the 


52  De  Civit.,  XV,  23;  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  First  Series, 
vol.  ii,  p.  305. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  253 

pseudonym,  but  is  content  to  abide  by  the  Jewish  canon  as 
comprising  the  only  genuine  Jewish  Scripture. 

When  the  Book  of  Enoch  thus  had  fallen  into  disrepute 
among  both  the  Jews  and  the  Christians  it  disappeared  from 
sight.  All  copies  seemed  to  have  been  lost  or  destroyed. 
All  that  the  Middle  Ages  or  the  more  modern  times  knew 
of  it  was  to  be  found  in  the  references  to  it  in  Jude  and 
in  the  writings  of  the  church  Fathers.  In  the  year  1773 
the  African  explorer  Bruce  found  an  Ethiopic  version  in 
the  Ethiopic  Bible  in  Abyssinia.  He  brought  three  copies 
back  to  Europe  with  him,  and  thus  this  book,  which  had 
been  lost  for  a  thousand  years,  came  again  into  the  posses- 
sion of  Christian  scholars.  It  was  found  to  contain  the 
words  quoted  by  Jude. 

It  is  written  in  the  name  of  Enoch  and  purports  to  give 
a  series  of  visions  granted  to  him.  Under  the  guidance  of 
an  angel  Enoch  travels  through  heaven  and  hell  and  has 
many  mysteries  explained  to  him.  All  the  coming  history 
of  Israel  is  shown  to  him  under  the  form  of  a  series  of 
conflicts  between  various  animals.  All  time  is  divided  into 
Ten  Weeks,  in  the  first  of  which  Enoch  himself  was  living, 
in  the  ninth  of  which  would  be  the  general  judgment,  and 
the  tenth  of  which  would  introduce  the  final  blessedness. 
The  inscription  to  the  book  itself  states  that  Moses  in  his 
one  hundred  and  twentieth  year  handed  it  to  Joshua  with 
the  Pentateuch;  but  all  modern  scholars  agree  that  it  must 
have  been  written  some  time  in  the  second  or  the  first  cen- 
tury B.  C,  while  some  even  put  its  date  into  the  beginning 
years  of  the  first  Christian  century. 

A  recent  commentator  upon  the  Apocalypse  thus  ap- 
praises the  book:  "It  is  quite  plain  that  this  apocalypse 
either  exerted  a  considerable  influence  on  the  generations 
immediately  before  and  contemporary  with  Jesus,  or  at 
least  reflects  a  large  number  of  ideas  which  were  in  the 
minds  of  men  of  these  generations,  and  are  not  accounted 
for  by  the  Old  Testament.     Such,  for  example,  is  the  de- 


254  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

veloped  doctrine  of  Angels  which  meets  us  at  the  very 
outset  of  the  New  Testament,  the  developed  doctrine  of 
the  Resurrection,  and  of  the  Day  of  Judgment.  It  is  very 
significant  too  that  no  fewer  than  four  titles  of  the  Messiah 
are  used  for  the  first  time  of  a  personal  Messiah  in  this 
Book  of  Enoch :  Christ  or  the  Anointed  One ;  the  Righteous 
One ;  the  Elect  or  Chosen  One ;  and  the  Son  of  Man.  And 
in  our  Lord's  own  words,  'when  the  Son  of  man  shall  sit 
on  the  throne  of  his  glory,'  there  is  an  echo,  it  may  be  a 
deliberate  quotation,  of  the  words  of  this  book."^^  Jude 
was  the  brother  of  our  Lord;  and  he  knew  and  quoted  the 
Book  of  Enoch.  It  would  seem  altogether  likely  that  Jesus 
had  read  it  and  he  may  have  quoted  from  it  too. 

Mr.  Charles,  who  is  a  leading  authority  upon  this  apoca- 
lyptic literature,  thinks  that  phrases,  clauses,  or  thoughts 
derived  from  the  Book  of  Enoch  are  to  be  found  not  only 
in  the  Epistle  of  Jude  and  in  the  Apocalypse  of  John,  but 
also  in  the  Gospels  according  to  John  and  Matthew  and 
Luke,  and  in  the  book  of  Acts,  and  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul 
to  the  Romans  and  to  the  Ephesians,  and  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews.^^  If  he  is  right  in  this  conclusion,  the  influ- 
ence of  the  Book  of  Enoch  is  to  be  traced  through  nearly 
the  whole  of  our  New  Testament ;  and  it  furnishes  a  model 
and  some  of  the  material  of  John's  Apocalypse.  Jesus 
and  Jude  and  John  must  have  had  considerable  respect  for 
this  revelation,  and  they  probably  considered  it  a  genuine 
work  of  the  patriarch  Enoch  himself. 

2.  In  the  Epistle  of  Jude  we  read  that  Michael  contended 
with  the  devil  about  the  body  of  Moses.^^  The  Old  Testa- 
ment tells  us  nothing  about  this.  Where  did  Jude  read 
about  it  ?  Origen  and  Didymus  and  Apollinaris  of  Laodicea 
all  vouch  for  the  fact  that  Jude  is  referring  to  an  account 
given  in  another  of  the  Jewish  Apocalypses,  The  Assump- 

*'  C.  Anderson  Scott,  The  New  Century  Bible,  Revelation,  p.  16. 
"  Op.  cit.,  note,  p.  16. 
"  Jude  9. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  255 

tion  of  Moses.  Not  much  is  known  about  this  book,  for 
it  seems  almost  entirely  to  have  perished.  Nicephorus  in- 
cludes it  in  his  stichometry,  and  he  gives  it  fourteen  hun- 
dred stichoi,  which  would  make  it  a  book  about  the  size 
of  the  Apocalypse  of  John.  In  1861  a  fragment  of  the 
book  was  discovered  in  a  Latin  version  in  the  Ambrosian 
Library  at  Milan.  On  the  basis  of  the  estimated  size  given 
by  Nicephorus,  we  conclude  that  this  fragment  represents 
about  one  third  of  the  original  work.  It  does  not  include 
the  closing  portion,  and  therefore  it  does  not  have  the  inci- 
dent referred  to  by  Jude ;  and  we  are  still  dependent  upon 
the  authority  of  the  church  Fathers  for  believing  that  Jude 
quotes  from  this  source.  The  fragment  shows,  however, 
that  this  work  belongs  to  the  Apocalypses.  It  is  supposed 
to  be  addressed  to  Joshua  by  Moses,  and  it  contains  a  pre- 
diction of  all  the  Jewish  history  down  to  the  year  B.  C.  4. 
The  end  of  all  things  is  to  follow  close  upon  that  date. 
The  book  is  of  special  interest  to  us  because  it  seems  to 
have  been  written  at  some  period  during  the  lifetime  of 
Jesus,  and  some  of  the  phrases  used  by  Jesus  may  have 
been  quoted  from  its  pages,  and  Stephen  seems  to  have 
followed  its  account  of  the  history  of  Moses  in  his  speech 
before  the  Sanhedrin,  and  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter 
makes  use  of  it  as  well  as  the  Epistle  of  Jude. 

3.  The  Apocalypse  of  Baruch  purports  to  be  a  revelation 
granted  to  Baruch,  the  faithful  friend  of  the  prophet  Jere- 
miah. It  is  supposed  to  have  been  written  shortly  after 
the  destruction  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem  in  the  year  A.  D. 
70,  and  its  purpose  is  to  comfort  the  Jews  depressed  by 
that  great  disaster.  According  to  its  representation  Baruch 
gathers  the  elders  of  the  people  into  the  valley  of  the 
Kidron,  and  there  announces  to  them  all  the  coming  disas- 
ters of  the  city  of  Zion,  and  then  predicts  the  Messianic 
reign  in  which  it  would  be  restored  and  crowned  with  glory 
forever.  Swete  says  that  this  Apocalypse  "approximates 
to    the    nearly    contemporary    Christian    Apocalypse    not 


256  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

merely    in    verbal    coincidences    and    the    use    of    similar 
imagery,  but  in  some  important  lines  of  thought."^^ 

4.  "In  some  respects  the  closest  parallel  to  our  Apoca- 
lypse is  provided  by  the  strangely  named  Fourth  Book  of 
Ezra,  or  Esdras,  a  Jewish  apocalypse  which  had  a  wide 
circulation  and  enjoyed  great  esteem  in  the  Christian 
Church,  and  may  be  found  to-day  in  the  English  Apoc- 
rypha. It  is  quoted  as  a  genuine  work  of  prophecy  by 
many  of  the  early  Fathers,  finds  a  place  in  several  Latin 
manuscripts  of  the  Bible,  and  appears  with  Third  Esdras 
as  an  Appendix  to  the  Roman  Vulgate.  In  its  original  form 
it  appears  to  have  consisted  of  seven  visions  which  purport 
to  have  been  seen  by  Ezra  in  Babylon,  beginning  in  the 
thirtieth  year  of  the  captivity.  But  the  actual  period  of 
the  book's  composition  is  to  be  found  somewhere  in  the 
first  century  A.  D.,  either  in  the  reign  of  Titus,  as  Ewald 
thought,  or  under  Nerva,  as  Hausrath  thought,  or  in  the 
time  of  Domitian,  as  Schiirer  concluded.  The  limits  thus 
suggested  being  practically  those  which  are  open  for  the 
Apocalypse  of  John,  the  two  books  may  be  regarded  as 
contemporary  productions,  the  one  proceeding  from  a 
Jewish,  the  other  from  a  Christian,  pen."^'^ 

Both  books  postpone  the  solution  of  the  problem  of  evil 
to  the  fast-approaching  end  of  all  things.  Both  describe 
the  glorious  reign  of  the  Messiah,  the  judgment,  and  some- 
thing of  the  intermediate  state.  Both  have  angelic  inter- 
preters. Both  represent  the  world  kingdoms  by  living  crea- 
tures— in  Ezra  by  an  eagle  with  three  heads  and  twelve 
wings  and  eight  secondary  wings,  and  in  John  by  a  beast 
with  many  heads  and  many  horns.  In  both  books  the 
Messiah  appears  in  the  form  of  a  lion,  and  in  both  the  lion 
appears  for  judgment.  In  both  a  woman  and  a  city  are 
identified,  and  the  one  fades  away  into  the  other  like  a 
dissolving  view. 

66  Swete,  The  Apocalypse  of  St.  John,  p.  xxii. 
"  Scott,  op.  cit.,  p.  18. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  257 

5.  There  are  other  books  belonging  to  this  department 
of  Hterature  which  may  have  influenced  the  imagery  and 
the  thought  of  John's  Apocalypse,  such  as  The  Ascension 
of  Isaiah,  the  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,  the 
Psalms  of  Solomon,  and  the  Sibylline  Oracles.  We  will 
mention  only  one  more.  The  Book  of  the  Secrets  of  Enoch, 
which  was  translated  into  English  by  Mr.  Charles  in  1896. 
Its  editor  decides  that  it  belongs  to  the  first  half  of  the 
first  Christian  century,  but  contains  fragments  of  still  older 
Jewish  apocalypses. 

VI.     The  Apocalypse  of  John  and  the  Jewish 
Apocalypses 

I.  Their  likeness.  Our  study  thus  far  has  made  one 
thing  clear — the  Apocalypse  of  John  belongs  to  a  class  of 
literature  which  had  sprung  up  among  the  Jews  after  the 
prophetic  inspiration  had  ceased  in  their  nation.  John  has 
not  originated  this  form  of  writing.  He  must  have  known 
some  if  not  all  of  these  books  we  have  mentioned.  They 
furnished  him  a  pattern,  which  he  more  or  less  closely  has 
followed.  We  must  remember,  as  Moffatt  suggests,  "That 
some  of  the  very  features  which  have  lost  much,  if  not 
all,  of  their  significance  for  later  ages,  ornate  and  cryptic 
expressions,  allusions  to  coeval  hopes  and  superstitions, 
grotesque  fantasies  and  glowing  creations  of  an  Oriental 
imagination,  the  employment  of  current  ideas  about  anti- 
christ, calculations  of  the  immediate  future,  and  the  use 
of  a  religious  or  semimythical  terminology  which  was  evi- 
dently familiar  to  some  Asiatic  Christians  in  the  first  cen- 
tury— these  more  or  less  ephemeral  elements  combined  to 
drive  home  the  message  of  the  book.  They  signify  to  us 
the  toll  which  had  to  be  paid  to  contemporary  exigencies; 
without  them  the  book  could  not  have  made  its  way  at  all 
into  the  conscience  and  the  imagination  of  its  audience."^^ 


68  Expositor's  Greek  Testament,  vol.  v,  p.  298. 


258  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

The  Pauline  epistles  mark  the  beginning  of  a  new  form 
of  literature;  and  Christian  letter-writing  has  continued 
through  all  the  centuries  to  our  own  day.  The  Gospels 
and  the  book  of  Acts  are  the  first  church  histories  and 
biographies,  and  Christian  histories  and  biographies  will  be 
written  to  the  end  of  time.  The  Apocalypse  of  John  more 
nearly  marks  the  end  than  the  beginning  of  a  species  of 
literature.  It  is  "the  final  and  brilliant  flash  of  the  red  light 
which  had  gleamed  from  Amos  down  to  the  Maccabees."^® 
There  were  Christian  Apocalypses  written  later  than  our 
Apocalypse,  but  they  were  by  unknown  authors  and  never 
were  recognized  as  authoritative  in  the  general  church  and 
soon  fell  into  disrepute  and  consequent  neglect,  and  for 
centuries  now  no  Christian  has  thought  of  composing  an 
Apocalypse. 

The  Apocalypse  of  John  is  the  only  Christian  Apocalypse 
J  read  in  the  church  to-day,  and  it  stands  as  the  last  in  the 

series  of  Apocalypses  we  have  been  studying.  It  is  like 
these  other  Apocalypses  (i)  in  the  general  situation  and 
historical  background  to  which  it  makes  response,  and  (2) 
in  the  general  purpose  of  consolation  in  distress  which  it 
answers,  and  (3)  in  the  general  doctrines,  especially  in  the 
field  of  eschatology,  which  they  represent,  and  (4)  in  much 
of  the  imagery  and  component  material  which  they  contain. 
For  example,  the  Book  of  Enoch  has  a  Tree  of  life  and  a 
Book  of  life,  heavenly  beings  clothed  in  white,  stars  falling 
from  heaven,  horses  wading  through  rivers  of  blood,  spirits 
presiding  over  the  winds  and  the  waters,  and  a  fiery  abyss 
awaiting  notorious  sinners.  All  of  these  things  reappear 
in  the  Apocalypse  of  John. 

In  the  Book  of  the  Secrets  of  Enoch  there  is  a  great 
sea  above  the  clouds,  and  in  the  third  heaven  there  is  a 
paradise  stocked  with  fruit  trees  bearing  all  manner  of 
ripe  fruits,  and  in  the  midst  of  it  the  tree  of  Life.    "Faces 


69  Moffatt,  op.  ciL,  p.  298. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  259 

are  seen  shining  like  the  sun,  and  eyes  as  lamps  of  fire; 
there  are  angels  set  over  seasons  and  years,  over  rivers  and 
the  sea,  over  all  the  souls  of  men;  six-winged  creatures 
overshadow  all  the  throne,  singing,  Holy,  Holy,  Holy;  the 
world  week  is  of  seven  thousand  years ;  Hades  is  a  fortress 
whose  keys  are  committed  to  safe  keeping."®^  This  is 
sufficient  to  suggest  that  there  is  much  of  common  material 
in  all  these  apocalyptical  books.  However,  the  Apocalypse 
of  John  differs  most  radically  from  all  these  other  books 
in  some  respects,  and  we  turn  next  to  the  enumeration  of 
these. 

2.  Their  Unlikeness.  (i)  The  Apocalypse  of  John  car- 
ries the  real  author's  name  on  its  forefront ;  and  this  dis- 
tinguishes it  from  all  the  Jewish  Apocalypses  which  had 
preceded  it.    They  are  pseudepigraphic,  and  it  is  not. 

(2)  They  conceal  not  only  the  real  author's  name  but 
his  whereabouts  and  all  facts  concerning  him.  On  the 
contrary,  the  Apocalypse  of  John  tells  us  that  its  author 
was  in  exile  on  the  isle  of  Patmos,  and  he  writes  to  seven 
churches  of  Asia  Minor  in  such  a  way  that  we  know  at 
about  what  time  he  is  writing. 

(3)  The  Apocalypse  of  John  is  a  Christian  book.  The 
glorified  Jesus  is  the  Messias  to  whom  all  the  Jewish  writers 
had  looked  forward.  He  is  the  central  and  commanding 
figure  throughout.  There  is  a  new  spirit  of  certainty  and 
prophetic  inspiration  and  apostolic  assurance  in  this  Apoca- 
lypse of  Jesus  which  the  older  books  of  necessity  lacked. 
The  Apocalypse  of  John  is  easily  distinguished  from  all 
other  books  of  the  class,  and  vindicates  its  right  to  a  place 
in  the  sacred  canon  from  which  they  have  been  excluded. 
It  is  the  consummate  flower  of  their  series,  and  there  is  a 
tone  of  divine  authority  about  it  which  has  spoken  to  the 
heart  of  the  church  through  all  time.  It  is  the  prophetic 
book   of   the   New   Testament.      It   unites   the   prophetic 


1/ 


«"  Swete,  op.  cit.,  p.  xxi. 


26o  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

element  of  the  Old  Testament  with  the  imagery  of  the 
Jewish  Apocalypses  in  the  proclamation  of  the  Christian 
faith  and  truth.  Let  us  turn  now  to  the  closer  study  of 
the  book  itself. 

VII.    A  Mysterious  Revelation 

The  Bible  and  the  Apocalypse  are  alike  in  this  respect 
that  they  are  both  mysterious  revelations.  The  Bible  itself 
is  a  book  of  revelation,  and  the  revelation  of  divine  truth 
in  the  Bible  is  so  clear  that  even  a  child  can  understand  it. 
He  who  runs  may  read.  The  essential  truths  of  the  Bible, 
once  heard,  never  are  forgotten.  Even  a  wayfaring  man, 
though  he  be  laboring  under  the  severest  subjective  dis- 
abilities, need  not  err  therein.  At  one  time  Jesus  answered 
and  said,  "I  thank  thee,  O  Father,  Lord  of  heaven  and 
earth,  because  thou  hast  revealed  these  things  unto  babes. 
Even  so,  Father,  for  so  it  seemed  good  in  thy  sight."^^ 
The  Bible  is  a  revelation  unto  babes,  a  book  for  the  kinder- 
garten, a  religious  primer  in  words  of  one  syllable. 

Listen  to  its  proclamation.  "God  is  love.  .  .  .  Ye  must  be 
born  anew.  .  .  .  Come  to  me,  .  .  .  and  I  will  give  you 
rest."62  There  is  the  heart  of  the  whole  thing.  A  revelation 
could  not  be  put  more  simply.  Anybody  can  understand 
that,  and  anybody  who  understands  and  appropriates  these 
simple  truths  can  become  a  Christian.  Our  Bible  revelation 
of  truth  is  in  truth  a  revelation.  Benjamin  Whichcote  was 
warranted  in  his  profession  of  faith,  when  he  said,  "This 
for  my  part  I  do  believe,  that  the  Scripture  is  clear  and  full 
of  light,  as  to  all  matters  of  conscience,  as  to  all  rules  of 
life,  as  to  all  necessary  matters  of  faith,  so  that  any  well- 
minded  man  that  takes  up  the  Bible  and  reads  may  come 
to  understanding  and  satisfaction." 

Yet  while  this  is  true  that  the  revelation  of  the  essentials 


"  Matt.  II.  25,  26. 

62  I  John  4.  16;  John  3.  7;  Matt.  11.  28. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  261 

of  salvation  in  the  Bible  is  so  clear  and  so  plain  that  even 
a  child  can  comprehend  or  apprehend  it,  it  is  equally  true 
that  there  are  other  portions  of  this  revelation  which  are 
so  difficult  of  exegesis  that  they  tax  the  utmost  powers 
of  the  greatest  minds  to  master  them.  There  are  problems 
in  the  Bible  so  difficult  of  understanding  that  even  the  wise 
and  the  prudent,  after  years  of  investigation  and  after  a 
lifetime  of  study,  declare  that  the  Book  is  not  a  revelation 
but  a  sealed  book  to  them.  The  Bible  is  no  shallow  urn 
whose  treasures  can  be  easily  exhausted.  It  is  like  that 
cup  given  the  young  god  Thor  to  drink  in  the  city  of 
Utgard.  It  could  not  be  emptied  at  one  draught,  for  all 
the  exhaustless  depths  of  the  ocean  were  filling  it.  Great 
scholars  have  grown  gray  in  the  study  of  the  book  and 
still  have  felt,  like  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  that  they  were  but 
children  picking  up  pebbles  on  the  shore  of  the  boundless, 
fathomless  deep.  Every  book  in  the  Bible  has  its  problems. 
Every  book  is  a  book  of  revelation,  filled  with  mystery. 

Now,  what  is  true  of  every  other  book  in  the  Bible  and 
of  the  Bible  as  a  whole  is  still  more  true  of  the  last  division 
of  the  volume,  as  we  have  it  to-day.  We  call  it,  the  last 
book  of  the  Bible,  the  book  of  Revelation ;  as  though  it, 
above  all  the  other  books,  would  be  characterized  by  per- 
spicuity, as  though  this  crowning  and  closing  book  of  the 
series  would  be  easiest  of  exegesis  and  clearest  and  most 
open  to  every  understanding.  Is  that  true  of  it  ?  The  book 
begins,  "The  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ,  which  God  gave 
him  to  show  unto  his  servants,  .  .  .  and  he  sent  and  signi- 
fied it  by  his  angel  unto  his  servant  John.  .  .  ,  Blessed  is  he 
that  readeth,  and  they  that  hear  the  words  of  this  prophecy, 
and  keep  the  things  that  are  written  therein:  for  the  time 
is  at  hand."^^  Then  we  read  through  its  twenty-two  chap- 
ters, and  we  find  ourselves  overwhelmed  with  questionings. 

What  is  this  book  anyway?    Is  it  contemporaneous  his- 

MRev.  I.  I,  3. 


262  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

tory?  Is  it  the  history  of  the  end  of  all  things?  Is  it  a 
history  of  the  successive  world  kingdoms  ?  Is  it  a  history 
of  the  church?  Is  it  history  at  all?  Is  it  history  or 
prophecy?  Is  it  a  prophetic  drama ?^*  Is  it  a  dramatic 
poem?  Is  it  pure  Apocalypse?  It  has  been  called  all  of 
these  things.  It  declares  itself  to  be  the  Revelation  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  but  it  turns  out  to  be  the  great  enigma 
of  the  New  Testament. 

Dionysius  of  Alexandria  says  that  there  were  those  in 
the  church  even  before  his  time  who  maintained  that  the 
title  of  the  book  was  a  fraudulent  one,  for  the  book  was 
without  sense  or  argument,  and  it  was  not  a  revelation,  be- 
cause it  was  covered  thickly  and  densely  by  a  veil  of  ob- 
scurity.^^ Jerome  in  the  fourth  century  wrote  to  Paulinus 
that  the  Apocalypse  of  John  had  as  many  mysteries  as 
words,  tot  verba,  tot  mysteria;  and  he  added:  "In  saying 
this  I  have  said  less  than  the  book  deserves.  All  praise  of 
it  is  inadequate;  manifold  meanings  lie  hid  in  its  every 
■word."^^  Many  modern  scholars  have  agreed  with  these 
conclusions.  Robert  South  asserts  that  "the  more  the  book 
is  studied,  the  less  it  is  understood,"  and  in  his  usual  blunt 
fashion  he  went  on  to  say  that  it  generally  found  a  man 
cracked  or  it  left  him  so.®'^  Luther  said  that  Christ  could 
neither  be  learned  nor  recognized  in  the  book,  and  he  de- 
clared that  no  one  knew  what  was  in  it,  "Niemand  weiss 
•was  darinnen  steht." 

Zwingli  refused  to  quote  it  for  doctrinal  proof  of  any- 
thing. De  Wette  declared  that  there  were  whole  chapters 
in  it  which  were  like  empty  vials ;  empty  bottles,  nothing  in 
them. 


«*  So  Eichhorn,  Commentary,  Chapter  IV,  Milton,  Palmer,  and 
Benson. 

65Eusebius,  Eccles.  Hist.,  VII,  25.  i,  2;  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene 
Fathers,  Second  Series,  vol.  i,  p.  309. 

««  Letter  LIII,  op.  ciL,  vol.  vi,  p.  102. 

«  Serm.  XXIII,  vol.  i,  377- 


THE  APOCALYPSE  263 

Possibly  these  scholars  are  right  and  we  cannot  under- 
stand or  profit  much  by  this  revelation.  Possibly  these 
scholars  are  wrong  and  have  been  misled  by  the  enemy 
of  their  souls  whose  constant  endeavor  it  is  to  deceive  men 
to  their  spiritual  loss.  Moody  seemed  to  think  so,  for  he 
said  that  this  is  the  only  book  in  the  Bible  which  tells  about 
the  devil  being  chained,  and  the  devil  knows  it  and  he 
goes  up  and  down  Christendom  saying:  "It  is  no  use  your 
reading  the  book  of  Revelation.  You  cannot  understand 
that  book.  It  is  too  hard  for  you,"  while  the  fact  is  that  he 
does  not  want  men  to  understand  about  his  own  defeat. 
If  Moody  is  correct  in  that  suggestion,  it  also  may  be  true 
that  the  devil  is  responsible  for  some  of  the  exegesis  of  this 
book. 

Bengel,^^  careful  critic  and  commentator,  devout  and 
earnest  student  of  the  Word,  learned  from  this  book  that 
the  world  was  to  come  to  an  end  on  the  eighteenth  of  June, 
1836.  We  who  live  in  the  twentieth  century  are  ready  to 
say  either  that  that  revelation  was  a  false  one  or  that  that 
revelation  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  book.  Hengstenberg«9 
in  his  commentary  declared  that  the  millennial  reign  began 
in  the  year  A.  D.  800  and  closed  in  the  year  A.  D.  1800, 
and  that  now  we  live  in  the  times  of  Gog,  Magog,  and 
Demagogue!  That  is  a  revelation  we  have  failed  to  find 
in  these  pages.  Most  of  us  think  that  the  millennial  age 
is  still  to  come. 

Garratt'O  found  in  the  book  prophecies  of  gunpowder 
and  cannon  and  steamboats  and  railroads;  but  we  doubt 
if  the  book  was  intended  to  be  a  revelation  of  these.  Hunt- 
ingford'i  made  of  the  book  a  complete  church  history, 
coming  down  to  the  time  of  the  French  Revolution,  and  he 
thought  that  the  best  commentary  upon  John's  vision  is 

«8  Erklarte  Off.  Joh.,  1740. 

6«  Erlauterung.    2  vols.,  1849,  1850. 

'"  Commentary  on  the  Revelation,  1878. 

1^  The  Apocalypse,  with  Commentary,  etc.,  1881. 


264  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Gibbon's  Decline  and  Fall  of  the  Roman  Empire;  but  we 
have  read  Gibbon  and  have  found  in  it  no  key  to  the  prob- 
lems which  this  book  presents.  We  do  not  need  to  go 
through  the  long  list  of  commentaries  on  the  Apocalypse. 
The  one  thing  they  all  very  clearly  prove  is  that  the  book  of 
the  Revelation  of  Jesus  Christ  is  a  book  very  difficult  to 
understand,  a  book  of  great  mystery,  w^hich  does  not  reveal 
the  same  things  to  all  minds  and  does  not  reveal  much  to 
some  of  the  most  profound  minds  among  them. 

Here,  then,  are  two  facts  concerning  the  closing  book 
of  our  canon.  Like  the  Bible  itself,  it  is,  first,  a  book  of 
blessed  revelation  and,  second,  a  book  of  profound  mystery. 
Possibly  better  than  any  other  single  book  in  the  Bible 
collection  of  books,  it  illustrates  this  double  characteristic 
of  the  Book  as  a  whole,  the  combination  of  promise  and 
puzzle  which  makes  this  volume  the  delight  of  both  the 
child  and  the  sage,  which  reveals  enough  to  satisfy  the  babe 
in  Christ  while  at  the  same  time  it  conceals  enough  to  make 
it  an  inexhaustible  source  of  perplexity  and  subject  of  study 
to  the  maturest  scholar  and  saint. 

The  book  of  Revelation  is  an  Apocalypse,  and  the  Apoca- 
lypse is  to  us  a  book  of  mystery.  The  Greek  words  for 
"Apocalypse"  and  "Mystery,"  dnoKaXvipig  and  iivaTriQiov,  had 
meanings  directly  opposed  to  each  other.  The  New  Testa- 
ment usage  of  these  words  has  interchanged  their  meanings 
in  the  most  extraordinary  fashion.  Paul  calls  the  gospel 
a  mystery,''' 2  but  he  does  not  mean  to  suggest  that  it  is  so 
mysterious  as  to  be  incomprehensible.  He  means,  rather, 
that  it  was  once  a  secret,  but  now  it  is  manifested  and  easily 
understood  by  anyone  who  would  hear  it.  It  was  unknown, 
but  now  it  is  a  revelation,  an  open  secret  to  all  the  world ; 
that  is  Paul's  meaning  of  the  word  "mystery"  in  his  discus- 
sion of  the  Christian  faith.  Apocalypse  meant  a  revelation 
too,  an  uncovering,  an  unveiling,  a  disclosing  of  all  that 

72  Eph.  6.  19. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  265 

was  secret  and  making  it  public  property.  However,  the 
Apocalypse  in  the  New  Testament  is  such  a  mysterious 
book  that  that  fact  almost  has  made  us  lose  sight  of  the 
first  meaning  of  the  word.  The  New  Testament  "mystery" 
is  a  revelation,  an  Apocalypse.  The  New  Testament  Apoca- 
lypse has  come  to  stand  in  our  minds  for  a  mystery,  a 
secret  undisclosed.  It  is  a  mysterious  revelation  whose 
meaning  eludes  us  at  many  points  and  whose  interpreta- 
tion baffles  us  again  and  again.  This  is  a  surprise  and  a 
disappointment  because  no  book  in  the  Bible  raises  our 
hopes  so  high  and  gives  us  reason  for  so  great  expectation 
in  the  beginning. 

VHI.    The  Fourfold  Assurance  of  the  Beginning  and 
THE  Fearful  Threat  at  the  End 

We  note,  first,  the  Personal  Presence  of  the  Revealer  in 
the  first  chapter.  No  other  book  in  the  New  Testament 
has  such  a  solemn  beginning.  Some  of  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament  almost  seem  to  have  been  written  by  acci- 
dent. At  least  they  were  called  forth  by  certain  things 
which  had  happened.  They  were  written  to  meet  certain 
occasions ;  and  there  is  no  slightest  indication  in  the  books 
themselves  that  the  authors  of  them  ever  expected  them 
to  serve  any  other  than  temporary  need  or  to  be  read  by 
any  more  than  a  single  individual  or  a  single  church.  This 
might  be  true  of  the  Second  and  the  Third  Epistle  of  John ; 
but  it  is  not  so  with  the  Apocalypse.  The  Christophany  of 
the  beginning  is  like  the  Theophanies  given  to  Isaiah  and 
Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel.  Solemn,  majestic,  awe-inspiring, 
the  Revealer  is  seen  first  in  his  divine  glory;  and  then 
comes  the  Revelation. 

We  note,  second,  the  Pleading  of  the  book  itself.  In  the 
second  and  third  chapters  of  the  book  we  have  seven 
epistles  addressed  to  seven  churches  of  Asia  Minor.  It  has 
been   suggested  that  in  these  seven  epistles  we  have  an 


266  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

epitome  of  the  contents  of  the  entire  book.  At  the  close 
of  each  of  these  epistles  we  come  upon  that  exhortation, 
"He  that  hath  an  ear,  let  him  hear  what  the  Spirit  saith 
to  the  churches.""^  In  this  seven-times  repeated  cry  we 
are  told  that  the  Spirit  is  speaking  to  the  churches  in  this 
book,  and  we  are  exhorted  to  hear  what  the  Spirit  has 
to  say.  We  note  this  seven-times  repeated  Pleading  found 
in  the  beginning  summary  of  the  book ;  and  we  are  im- 
pressed with  the  unusual  importance  of  the  message  we 
are  about  to  receive. 

We  notice,  in  the  third  place,  the  Purpose  for  which  the 
book  was  written,  as  announced  by  the  author  himself. 
He  tells  us  that  he  was  a  brother  and  partaker  with  those 
whom  he  addressed  in  the  tribulation  and  kingdom  and 
patience  which  are  in  Jesus  ;'^*  and  he  declares  that  he 
purposes  to  show  unto  these  the  things  which  must  shortly 
come  to  pass.'^^  Bearing  in  mind  this  Purpose  of  spiritual 
and  valuable  revelation  and  the  sevenfold  Pleading  that 
we  may  hear  what  the  Spirit  has  to  say  to  the  churches, 
and  the  guarantee  of  authority  in  the  Personal  Presence 
of  the  Revealer  in  the  opening  vision  of  the  book,  we  note, 
in  the  fourth  place,  the  Promise  prefixed  to  this  volume. 
There  we  read,  "Blessed  is  he  that  readeth,  and  they  that 
hear  the  words  of  the  prophecy,  and  keep  the  things  which 
are  written  therein:  for  the  time  is  at  hand."'''^  This  is 
the  only  book  in  the  Bible  which  has  any  explicit  promise 
of  that  sort  attached  to  it.  It  may  be  that  we  will  be 
blessed  in  reading  some  or  all  of  these  other  books  in  the 
Bible.  We  take  it  for  granted  that  we  will  be ;  but  here 
assurance  is  rendered  doubly  sure  by  this  explicit  promise 
put  into  our  hands  as  we  open  the  book. 


^3  Rev.  2.  7,  II,  17,  29;  3.  6,  13,  22. 
"Rev.  1.9. 
^5  Rev.  I.I. 
«  Rev.  I.  3. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  267 

Corresponding  to  this  promise  in  the  preface,  there  is  a 
solemn  Threat  at  the  close.  "I  testify  unto  every  man  that 
heareth  the  words  of  the  prophecy  of  this  book,  If  any  man 
shall  add  unto  them,  God  shall  add  unto  him  the  plagues 
which  are  written  in  this  book:  and  if  any  man  shall  take 
away  from  the  words  of  the  book  of  this  prophecy,  God. 
shall  take  away  his  part  from  the  tree  of  life,  and  out  of  the 
holy  city,  which  are  written  in  this  book."^'^  Both  at  the 
beginning  and  at  the  end  of  his  book  John  seems  to  be  con- 
scious of  the  supreme  importance  of  what  he  is  writing  and 
to  expect  it  to  be  read  in  wide  circles  and  to  be  heard  by  \y 
multitudes  and  to  be  a  blessing  to  all  to  whom  it  may  come. 
He  seems  anxious  to  preserve  the  text  intact,  so  that  even 
if  it  is  copied  again  and  again,  the  last  to  receive  it  in 
the  farthest  remove  of  territory  or  among  the  latest  genera- 
tions of  men  may  be  sure  of  having  the  original  truth.  The 
language  he  uses  is  taken  from  two  passages  in  Deuter- 
onomy, and  in  the  adoption  of  these  words  John  seems 
to  put  his  writing  upon  a  par  with  that  of  Moses  and  to 
claim  for  it  a  place  in  sacred  Scripture  for  all  time. 

The  Personal  Presence  there  at  the  beginning  of  the 
book,  the  Purpose  of  the  book,  the  Pleading  of  the  book, 
the  Promise  of  the  book,  and  the  Threat  at  the  end  lead 
us  to  think  that  this  will  be  a  book  of  clearest  and  invaluable 
revelation,  and  having  finished  the  first  three  chapters,  we 
are  ready  to  read  on  with  four  times  the  confidence  with 
which  we  would  approach  any  other  pages  of  the  Bible. 
Then  as  we  plunge  on  from  chapter  to  chapter  we  find 
ourselves  getting  farther  and  farther  out  of  our  depth,  the 
puzzles  and  problems  multiply  on  every  hand,  and  while 
there  are  passages  here  and  there  which  are  beautifully 
simple  and  blessedly  clear,  we  soon  see  that  the  book  as 
a  whole  is  the  most  difficult  to  comprehend  in  the  whole 
Bible. 

"  Rev.  22.  18,  19. 


268  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

IX.    Two  Reasons  Why  the  Inspiration  of  the  Book 
HAS  Been  Doubted 

1.  One  critic  has  said,  "Here  all  is  dark  and  perplexing — 
an  extravagance  of  figure  such  as  was  never  before  wit- 
nessed, and  an  irregularity  of  language  such  as  has  no 
parallel  in  any  ancient  writing,  either  sacred  or  profane." 
Augustine  was  of  the  same  opinion:  "Though  this  book  is 
called  the  Apocalypse,  there  are  in  it  many  obscure  passages 
to  exercise  the  mind  of  the  reader,  and  there  are  few  pas- 
sages so  plain  as  to  assist  us  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
others,  even  though  we  take  pains;  and  this  difficulty  is 
increased  by  the  repetition  of  the  same  things,  in  forms 
so  different  that  the  things  referred  to  seem  to  be  different, 
although,  in  fact,  they  are  only  differently  stated.'"^^ 

A  modern  scholar  refuses  to  accept  various  theories  of 
interpretation  of  the  Apocalypse  and  then  confesses:  "I 
am  unable  to  give  any  better  solution  of  my  own,  feeling 
like  one  of  Cicero's  disputants,  'facilius  me,  talihus  de 
rebus,  quid  non  sentirem,  quam  quid  sentirem,  posse 
dicere.'  "^^  It  is  small  wonder  then  that  there  always  have 
been  those  who  have  doubted  whether  this  book  was  in- 
spired and  who  have  been  ready  to  ask,  "If  the  other  books 
of  the  Bible  are  inspired  books,  how  can  this  book  be  in- 
spired? If  they  are  adapted  to  the  revelation  of  the  new 
dispensation,  how  can  it  be  adapted  to  the  same  end?  Is 
it  possible  that  this  book  can  be  from  Him  who  leads  in 
a  plain  path  and  has  promised  his  clear  teaching  and  the 
sure  knowledge  of  his  truth?" 

2.  Many  of  the  interpreters  of  this  book  have  helped 
to  bring  it  into  disrepute.  They  are  so  sure,  each  of  them, 
that  they  are  right.  They  are  equally  sure  that  all  others 
are  radically  wrong.    They  differ  with  each  other  as  widely 


7»De  Civit.  Dei,  XX,  17;  Nicene  and  Post-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  ii, 
p.  436. 

"  Salmon,  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  p.  224. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  269 

as  possible  both  in  their  systems  of  interpretation  and  in 
the  results  of  their  research.  The  same  figures  represent 
to  different  exegetes  characters  as  different  as  could  be 
imagined  and  the  same  forms  of  expression  furnish  them 
with  dates  which  differ  from  each  other  by  centuries.  We 
are  apt  to  conclude  that  every  man  makes  the  book  mean 
just  what  he  desires  it  to  mean,  and  we  can  make  it  mean 
whatever  we  choose. 

The  book  has  been  grossly  misused  by  those  who  have 
endeavored  to  discover  in  it  a  chronology  either  of  world 
history  or  of  the  end  of  all  things.  Jiilicher  is  surely  right 
when  he  says,  "It  is  unreasonable  to  treat  the  detail  of 
its  imageries  as  an  authentic  source  for  a  history  of  the 
past  or  the  future."^^  This  is  especially  true  of  the  at- 
tempts to  figure  out  from  its  data  the  exact  time  for  the 
end  of  the  world.  Those  who  waste  their  time  in  this 
effort  seem  to  have  forgotten  what  the  Lord  said,  "Of 
that  day  or  that  hour  knoweth  no  one,  not  even  the  angels 
in  heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but  the  Father."®^ 

John  had  no  thought  of  prying  into  the  secrets  of  the 
Most  High.  He  believed,  like  all  the  other  writers  of  the 
New  Testament,  that  the  end  of  the  world  would  come 
unexpectedly,  like  a  thief  in  the  night.  In  view  of  that 
fact  he  has  scattered  exhortations  to  watchfulness  through 
all  his  book.  At  the  Lord's  command  he  wrote  to  the  angel 
of  the  church  in  Sardis,  "If  therefore  thou  shalt  not  watch, 
I  will  come  as  a  thief,  and  thou  shalt  not  know  what  hour 
I  will  come  upon  thee."^^  Jn  one  of  the  later  visions  of 
the  great  day  of  God,  the  Almighty,  he  interrupts  the 
narrative  to  insert  the  statement,  "Behold,  I  come  as  a 
thief.  Blessed  is  he  that  watcheth."^^  Watchfulness  was 
necessary  because  neither  John  nor  any  man  knew  the  hour 
of  the  Lord's  approach. 

^  Jiilicher,  Introduction,  p.  168. 

81  Mark  13.  32. 

82  Rev.  3.  3.  83  Rev.  16.  15. 


270  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Philip  Schaff  has  well  said:  "All  mathematical  calcula- 
tions about  the  second  advent  are  doomed  to  disappoint- 
ment, and  those  who  want  to  know  more  than  our  blessed 
Lord  knew  in  the  days  of  his  flesh  deserve  to  be  disap- 
pointed. 'It  is  not  for  you  to  know  times  or  seasons,  which 
the  Father  hath  set  within  his  own  authority,'  Acts  i.  7. 
This  settles  the  question."®'*  However,  many  of  the  com- 
mentators do  not  have  his  common  sense,  and  when  we 
turn  to  them  we  find  many  of  their  books  filled  with  the 
most  absurd  conclusions,  based  upon  the  most  extravagant 
exegesis.    They  are  impositions,  rather  than  expositions. 

X.    Some  Curiosities  of  Exegesis 

1.  Take  that  problem  of  the  antichrist  as  one  example. 
Bishop  Raineri  of  Florence  figured  it  out  on  the  basis  of 
the  data  furnished  him  in  this  book  that  the  antichrist  was 
to  be  born  in  the  year  A.  D.  1080.  Fifty  years  after  that 
date  we  find  Saint  Norbert,  in  11 30,  telling  Saint  Bernard 
the  same  thing.  A  century  after  this,  in  1227,  Peter  the 
Minorite  was  preaching  that  the  antichrist  was  then  ten 
years  old.  Two  hundred  years  later,  in  1412,  Vincent  of 
Ferrara  told  Pope  Benedict  VIII  that  the  antichrist  was 
nine  years  old  at  that  date.  Bengel  declared  that  the  be- 
ginning of  the  conflict  with  the  antichrist  would  come  in 
the  year  1790.  Hengstenberg  decided  that  Satan  was  set 
loose  in  the  year  1848.  You  can  take  your  choice.  If  one 
of  these  men  is  right,  the  others  are  wrong.  Who  can  tell 
which  one  of  them  is  right  ?  Who  knows  but  that  all  of 
them  are  wrong?  We  think  that  the  latter  supposition 
represents  the  largest  probability  and,  indeed,  the  certainty 
in  the  case.  These  conclusions  evidently  are  not  based 
upon  general  principles,  but  upon  the  individual  environ- 
ment. They  are  the  results  of  personal  prejudice  rather 
than  of  preeminent  spiritual  insight. 

2.  Notice  the  different  conclusions  as  to  the  human  in- 


^  Schaff,  op.  cit.,  p.  850. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  271 

carnations  of  the  antichrist.  Amalrich  of  Bena  said  in 
his  day  that  the  power  and  the  spirit  of  the  antichrist  was 
represented  by  John  Wiclif  and  the  heterodox  Mystics. 
Later,  the  Roman  Catholic  theologians  were  sure  that  the 
personality  of  the  antichrist  was  incarnate  in  Martin  Luther 
and  the  other  Reformers.  On  the  other  hand,  the  leaders 
of  the  Protestant  Reformation  were  sure  that  the  papacy 
was  the  great  whore  and  the  pope  was  the  antichrist. 

3.  Bellarmin,  the  Jesuit,  said  the  hellish  grasshoppers  of 
the  ninth  chapter  were  the  Reformers.  Nicolas  Vignier 
said  the  hellish  grasshoppers  were  the  monks. 

4.  Bugenhagen,  in  1546,  said  that  the  angel  with  the  eter- 
nal gospel,  in  14.  6,  was  Martin  Luther,  Calovius  went  a  step 
farther  and  said  that  the  three  angels  mentioned  in  this  chap- 
ter were  Luther,  Chemnitz,  and  himself.  Such  a  conclusion 
is  liable  to  the  suspicion  that  it  is  the  result  of  personal  bias 
and  that  it  has  been  based  upon  personal  prepossessions. 

5.  As  a  sample  of  one  of  the  apocalyptic  problems  and 
a  good  example  of  radically  differing  and  mutually  exclu- 
sive interpretations,  look  at  the  number  of  the  beast.  We 
read,  "He  that  hath  understanding,  let  him  count  the  num- 
ber of  the  beast;  for  it  is  the  number  of  a  man:  and  his 
number  is  Six  hundred  and  sixty  and  six" ;  and  in  the 
margin  we  find,  "Some  ancient  authorities  read.  Six  hun- 
dred and  sixteen."^^  Then  we  turn  to  the  commentators 
and  the  exegetes  to  see  who  among  them  has  understanding 
and  can  interpret  the  number  of  the  beast  and  give  us  the 
name  of  the  man.  We  find  a  host  of  them  with  rival 
explanations,  and  each  of  them  is  sure  he  is  right.  They 
prove  to  us,  each  in  turn,  that  the  beast  is  Caligula,  Nero, 
Titus,  Trajan,  Julian  the  Apostate,  Genseric  the  Vandal, 
Pope  Benedict  IX,  Pope  Paul  V,  Louis  XV,  Mohammed, 
Martin  Luther,  John  Calvin,  Beza,  Archbishop  Laud,  the 
Duke  of  Reichstadt,  and  Napoleon  Bonaparte.^^ 

^  Rev.  13.  18. 

^  Salmon,  Introduction  to  New  Testament,  p.  230. 


272  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

It  was  in  the  nineteenth  century  that  the  famous  dis- 
covery of  the  long-sought- for  true  and  indisputable  ex- 
planation of  that  mysterious  number  six  hundred  and  sixty- 
six  took  place.  It  seems  to  have  been  made  simultaneously 
and  independently  by  Fritzche  in  Rostock,  Benary  in  Berlin, 
Reuss  in  Strassburg,  and  Hitzig  in  Zurich.  Each  of  these 
claims  to  have  hit  upon  it  first ;  just  as  there  are  many 
rival  claimants  for  the  first  invention  of  the  telephone. 
Each  of  these  men  tells  us  that  the  name  is  Nero  Caesar, 
written  in  Hebrew  letters.  The  Hebrews  and  Greeks  had 
no  figures  like  ours.  They  gave  a  numerical  value  to  the 
letters  of  their  alphabet,  and  thus  made  them  do  double 
service  in  mathematics  and  in  literature.  Every  man's 
name,  therefore,  represented  a  certain  number,  found  by 
adding  together  the  numerical  equivalents  of  the  various 
letters  by  which  it  was  spelled. 

In  the  Epistle  of  Barnabas  we  are  told  that  the  name 
"Jesus,"  Irjoovg,  is  expressed  by  the  number  eight  hundred 
and  eighty-eight,  and  we  obtain  that  number  by  adding  to- 
gether the  numerical  equivalents  of  the  Greek  letters.^'^  In 
the  Pseudo-Sibylline  verses,  written  by  Christians,  probably 
toward  the  end  of  the  second  century,  there  are  enigmas 
giving  a  number  and  requiring  a  name.  One  on  the  name 
"Jesus,"  ^Irjoovg,  reads  as  follows :  "He  will  come  on  earth 
clothed  with  flesh  like  mortal  men.  His  name  contains  four 
vowels  and  two  consonants ;  two  of  the  former  being 
sounded  together.  And  I  will  declare  the  entire  number. 
For  the  name  will  exhibit  to  incredulous  men  eight  units, 
eight  tens,  and  eight  hundreds."  Now  as  the  number  of 
Jesus  is  eight  hundred  and  eighty-eight,  John  tells  us  that 
the  number  of  the  beast  is  six  hundred  and  sixty-six,  and 
this  is  also  the  name  of  a  man.  This  name,  the  scholars 
tell  us,  is  Nero  Caesar. 

When  we  add  together  the  numerals  represented  by  the 


1 


*'I=io;  v  =  8;  ff  =  200 ;  o  =  70 ;  v  =  400 ;  <j"  =  200. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  273 

Hebrew  letters  spelling  the  name  and  title,  Nero  Caesar, 
we  have  a  total  of  six  hundred  and  sixty-six.^^  j^  thjg 
explanation  that  alternate  number,  six  hundred  and  sixteen, 
found  in  the  margin,  is  accounted  for.  If  we  spell  Nero 
without  a  final  Nun  that  drops  fifty  out  of  the  sum  total 
and  leaves  us,  instead  of  six  hundred  and  sixty-six,  only 
six  hundred  and  sixteen.  This  solution  of  the  mystery 
has  been  adopted  by  Baur,  Zeller,  Hilgenfeld,  Volkmar, 
Hausrath,  Krenkel,  Renan,  Sabatier,  Davidson,  Farrar, 
Stuart,  Cowles,  and  many  others.  The  great  objection  to 
it  is  that  it  seems  so  easy  and  self-evident  and  yet  nobody 
seems  to  have  suspected  it  in  the  early  church  or  for  the 
first  eighteen  centuries  of  church  history.  It  would  be 
marvelous  indeed  if,  having  remained  hidden  from  all  the 
scholars  and  saints  of  the  church  through  so  many  cen- 
turies, the  correct  interpretation  should  suddenly  and 
simultaneously  become  manifest  to  four  German  professors. 
Caligula  in  Hebrew  and  in  Greek,  either  as  nop  DJ^pDJ  or 
TAIOS  KAICAP,  by  gematria  is  equivalent  to  616,  and  so 
is  KAIOAP  0EOC,    the  Emperor  (is)  God! 

Salmon  in  his  Introduction  says:  "A  man  must  know 
very  little  of  the  history  of  the  interpretations  of  this  num- 
ber if  he  can  flatter  himself  that  because  he  has  found  a 
word  the  numerical  value  of  whose  letters  makes  the  re- 
quired sum  he  is  sure  of  having  the  true  solution.  .  .  . 
There  are  three  rules  by  the  help  of  which  I  believe  an 
ingenious  man  could  find  the  required  sum  in  any  given 
name.  First,  if  the  proper  name  by  itself  will  not  yield  it, 
add  a  title;  secondly,  if  the  sum  cannot  be  found  in  Greek, 
try  Hebrew,  or  even  Latin ;  thirdly,  do  not  be  too  particular 
about  the  spelling.  The  use  of  a  language  different  from 
that  to  which  the  name  properly  belongs  allows  a  good  deal 
of  latitude  in  the  transliteration.  For  example,  if  Nero  will 
not  do,  try  Csesar  Nero.    If  this  will  not  succeed  in  Greek, 


'"iDp  P"l3.     J  =  50;  T  =  20o;  1  =  6;  3  =50;  p—  100;  D  =  6o;  "1  =  200. 


274  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

try  Hebrew;  and  in  writing  Kaisar  in  Hebrew  be  sure  to 
leave  out  the  Jod,  which  would  make  the  sum  too  much 
by  ten."  And  then  Salmon  concludes,  "We  cannot  infer 
much  from  the  fact  that  a  key  fits  the  lock  if  it  is  a  lock 
in  which  almost  any  key  will  turn."*^ 

Then  he  quotes  with  approval  the  way  in  which  Irenaeus 
sums  up  the  whole  situation.  Irenaeus  had  made  at  least 
three  guesses  himself  at  this  number.  He  had  suggested, 
svdvdag,  "the  Golden-haired,"  Xarstvog^  "the  Latin,"  and 
TELTav,  "the  Titan."  All  of  these  words  will  count  up  that 
number,  six  hundred  and  sixty-six ;  but  there  were  so  many 
words  which  would  do  that  that  Irenaeus  said,  "It  is  safer, 
therefore,  and  less  hazardous  to  await  the  event  of  the 
prophecy  than  to  try  to  guess  or  divine  the  name,  since 
haply  the  same  number  may  be  found  to  suit  many  names. 
For  if  the  names  which  are  found  to  contain  the  same 
number  prove  to  be  many,  which  of  them  will  be  borne 
by  the  coming  one  will  remain  a  matter  of  inquiry."^*' 

It  may  be  interesting  to  notice  in  this  connection  that 
Heumann,  Herder,  Volkmar,  and  Godet  suggest  that  the 
number  six  hundred  and  sixty-six,  which  in  Greek  letters 
is  y^g^  consists  of  the  usual  abbreviation  of  the  name  of 
Christ,  x^,  and  then  between  these  two  letters,  thrusting 
them  asunder,  that  other  letter  is  inserted,  which  is  a  fit 
symbol  of  the  serpent  in  form  and  in  sound,  to  represent 
the  power  of  the  antichrist  in  its  endeavor  to  break  asunder 
and  scatter  abroad  the  representatives  of  the  Holy  Name. 
Godet  puts  it  thus:  "Observe,  first,  that  in  the  Greek  it  is 
written,  not  with  the  same  figure  three  times  repeated,  but 
with  three  letters  of  different  shapes,  the  mutual  relation 
of  whose  values  (six  hundreds,  six  tens,  six  units)  is  not 
at  first  sight  clear.  .  .  .  Next,  observe  that  these  three 
Greek  letters  have  a  peculiarity  which  is  not  reproduced  in 
our  numerical  writing."    He  then  gives  the  explanation  of 

*^  Salmon,  Introduction,  pp.  230,  231. 

•0  Against  Heresies,  V,  30;  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  vol.  i,  p.  559. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  275 

the  letters  just  mentioned,  and  adds,  "Now,  as  the  name 
which  John  commonly  gives  to  Satan  in  the  Apocalypse  is 
the  old  serpent,  in  allusion  to  the  story  of  the  temptation  in 
Gen.  3,  one  is  naturally  disposed  to  see  in  these  three  let- 
ters, so  arranged,  a  figurative  sign  of  the  Satanic  Messian- 
ism,  substituted  for  that  of  the  Divine  Messianism,  or 
Christianity."'^^ 

All  of  which  is  very  ingenious ;  but  we  are  still  of  the 
opinion  of  Irenseus  that  it  will  be  best  to  await  the  solution 
of  the  mystery  in  the  light  of  better  data  than  we  now  have. 
Swete,  one  of  the  latest  commentators  on  the  Apocalypse, 
says,  "It  is  possible  that  the  Number  of  the  Beast  holds 
its  secret  still.  Although  the  challenge  6  e%wv  vovv  xpT]<piadT(o 
Tov  dpcdfiov  has  been  accepted  by  the  scholars  of  many  gen- 
erations, no  solution  hitherto  offered  commands  general 
assent."^2 

Many  incline  to  think  that  the  number  six  hundred  and 
sixty-six  was  purely  symbolical  in  the  mind  of  John,  to 
represent  the  one  who  continuously  fell  short  of  perfection, 
6 — 6 — 6  never  becoming  seven.  Or,  the  three  sixes  represent 
worldly  glory,  worldly  wisdom,  worldly  civilization  which 
when  joined  together  still  fall  short  of  divine  perfection. 
Such  or  similar  views  were  held  by  Herder,  Auberlen, 
Hengstenberg,  Maurice,  Wordsworth,  Vaughan,  Carpenter, 
and  others.  A  symbolical  interpretation  would  either  pre- 
clude an  individual  appropriation  of  this  number  or  it 
would  allow  many  such  individual  appropriations  and  thus 
could  be  made  the  peculiar  property  of  none.  We  have 
cited  these  as  curiosities  of  exegesis,  nothing  more.  They 
are  samples  of  interpretations  which  might  be  paralleled 
and  multiplied  on  almost  every  page  of  the  book.  The  only 
safe  way  in  studying  the  book  of  Revelation  is  to  get  one 
commentator  and  read  him  and  believe  everything  he  says. 


91  Biblical  Studies,  New  Testament,  pp.  388,  389. 
'2  Swete,  op.  cit.,  p.  cxxxiii. 


276  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

If  we  read  another  commentator,  we  will  find  him  contra- 
dicting the  conclusions  of  the  former,  and  we  will  be  more 
or  less  thrown  into  confusion;  and  if  we  read  twenty  com- 
mentators, we  are  likely  to  end  by  being  in  a  state  of  abso- 
lute uncertainty  about  everything. 

XI.    Best  General  Attitude  Toward  the  Book 

The  man  who  knows  what  everything  in  this  book  means 
is  the  man  of  narrow  outlook  and  meager  information. 
Adam  Clarke  said  he  could  not  pretend  to  explain  this  book, 
for  he  did  not  understand  it.  John  Wesley  said:  "How 
little  do  we  know  of  this  deep  book!  At  least  how  little 
do  I  know.  I  can  barely  conjecture,  not  affirm,  any  one 
point  concerning  that  part  of  it  which  is  yet  unfilled."^^ 
Men  of  the  mental  caliber  of  these  giants  of  the  faith  will, 
as  a  general  rule,  come  to  the  same  conclusion.  Est  etiam 
nesciendi  qucedam  ars. 

There  are  some  people  who  do  not  like  to  come  to  that 
conclusion.  They  never  get  over  the  feeling  that  they  ought 
to  know  all  of  everything.  They  rather  resent  the  fact  that 
God  does  not  choose  to  make  them  equi-omniscient  with 
himself.  They  complain  of  Bible  obscurities  as  though  in 
some  fashion  they  constituted  a  personal  affront.  They 
chafe  under  the  limitations  of  their  finite,  if  not  infinite, 
ignorance;  and  are  ready  to  lose  their  temper  if  you  suggest 
that  their  proposed  solution  of  any  problem  is  not  assuredly 
and  infallibly  correct.  Anyway,  they  prefer  to  worry  about 
dark  passages  rather  than  to  walk  in  the  light  of  the  clear 
ones.  There  are  difficulties  in  the  Bible  which  probably 
will  be  to  us  forever  insurmountable,  problems  which  will 
be  to  us  insoluble,  many  things  which  we  would  like  to  know 
but  possibly  never  will  be  able  to  know  with  all  our  study 
and  endeavor. 

When  Talmage  was  a  student  he  persisted  in  posing  his 


•»  Journal,  December  6,  1762. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  277 

professor  with  questions  about  the  great  Bible  mysteries; 
asking  things  which  no  man  could  answer.  One  day  the 
professor  turned  upon  him  with  this  retort,  "Mr.  Talmage, 
you  will  have  to  let  God  know  some  things  you  don't." 
Those  were  wise  words  written  in  the  Preface  to  the 
Authorized  Version  in  the  Address  of  the  Translators  to 
the  Reader:  "It  hath  pleased  God  in  his  divine  providence 
here  and  there  to  scatter  words  and  sentences  of  that  diffi- 
culty and  doubtfulness,  not  in  doctrinal  points  that  concern 
salvation  (for  in  such  it  hath  been  vouched  that  the  Scrip- 
tures are  plain),  but  in  matters  of  less  moment,  that  fear- 
fulness  would  better  beseem  us  than  confidence."  We 
might  as  well  recognize  that  fact  first  as  last. 

There  are  some  things  in  the  Bible  we  cannot  know. 
Possibly  there  never  was  a  more  vigorous  intellect  wrestling 
with  the  great  problems  of  the  Christian  faith  than  that  of 
Martin  Luther,  the  great  Reformer.  What  does  Luther 
say?  "If  a  difficulty  meets  thee  which  thou  canst  not  solve, 
so  let  it  go."  We  do  not  like  to  do  that.  We  feel  like  say- 
ing to  ourselves,  "Here  is  a  difficulty,  a  stone  wall  we  can- 
not see  through  or  climb  over.  What  shall  we  do  about 
it?  Forsooth  against  it  we  will  proceed  instanter  to  beat 
out  our  brains  !"  Luther  knew  better.  He  was  great  enough  ^ 
to  know  that  he  could  not  know  all  things.  He  was  humble 
enough  to  believe  that  there  were  some  mysteries  he  must 
be  content  to  leave  unsolved.  He  was  great  enough  and 
wise  enough  to  say,  "So  let  it  go."  Now,  if  there  is  any 
book  in  the  Bible  in  the  study  of  which  it  would  be  wise 
for  us  to  follow  Luther's  advice,  it  is  this  book  of  the 
Revelation  of  John. 

XII.    Different  Schools  of  Interpretation 

Having  said  so  much  by  way  of  preface  to  this  sub- 
ject, let  us  glance  at  some  of  the  different  systems  or 
schools  of  interpretation. 


278  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

1.  There  is  the  Preterist  School,  represented  more  or 
less  faithfully  by  Grotius,  Hammond,  Bousset,  Clericus, 
Wetstein,  Herder,  Hug,  Eichhorn,  Ewald,  De  Wette, 
Liicke,  Baur,  Bleek,  Volkmar,  Dusterdieck,  Reuss,  Renan, 
Cowles,  Krenkel,  Weizsacker,  Weiss,  Moses  Stuart,  Mau- 
rice, Davidson,  Farrar,  and  others.  This  school  holds  that 
all  these  prophecies  refer  to  events  which  are  now  past, 
and  have  been  long  fulfilled. 

2.  Then  there  is  the  Futurist  School,  represented  by 
Ribera,  De  Burgh,  Maitland,  Benj.  Newton,  Todd,  Isaac 
Williams,  W.  Kelly,  Hofmann,  Fuller,  Kliefoth,  Zahn,  and 
others.  These  believe  that  the  prophecies  relate  to  events 
which  lie  in  the  future,  probably  in  the  far  future,  and 
which  will  be  fulfilled  only  at  the  coming  of  the  Lord, 
usually  conceived  as  a  catastrophic  parousia. 

3.  Then  there  is  the  Historical  School,  which  partly 
agrees  with  each  of  the  schools  preceding.  The  representa- 
tives of  this  school  think  that  some  of  the  prophecies  have 
been  fulfilled,  and  some  are  to  be  fulfilled,  and  some  are 
being  fulfilled.  In  the  Apocalypse,  that  is  to  say,  they  find 
a  history  of  events  extending  from  the  beginning  of  the 
Christian  era  to  the  end  of  the  age.  Luther,  Bullinger  and 
many  of  the  Reformers  belonged  to  this  school,  as  do  also 
Mede,  Vitringa,  Sir  Isaac  Newton,  Whiston,  Bengel,  Bishop 
Newton,  Hengstenberg,  Ebrard,  Auberlen,  Elliott,  Faber, 
Bishop  Wordsworth,  Dean  Alford,  Barnes,  Bickersteth, 
Birks,  Gaussen,  Godet,  Lee,  Vaughan,  Benson,  Boyd-Car- 
penter,  Milligan,  Scott,  Swete,  and  others.  Among  these 
Weiss  and  Holtzmann  and  others  have  suggested  sub- 
divisions. There  is  the  Church-historical  School,  which 
thinks  that  all  these  visions  and  apocalyptic  pictures  are  to 
be  interpreted  of  the  events  of  church  history  alone.  There 
is  the  Imperial-historical  School  which  makes  them  refer 
to  the  rise  and  fall  of  world-kingdoms,  the  development 
and  the  decline  of  great  world-powers  as  they  successively 
influence  the  life  and  growth  of  the  church. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  279 

XIII.    Best  System  of  Interpretation 

In  which  of  these  shall  we  enroll  ourselves?  We  are 
tempted  to  say,  As  far  as  possible,  in  all.  They  each  have 
some  good  in  them,  and  we  are  inclined  to  think  that  in 
some  things  each  of  them  may  be  right.  However,  we  think 
that  all  are  wrong  who  limit  the  application  of  these 
prophecies  and  the  fulfillment  of  these  apocalyptic  visions 
to  any  particular  time  in  the  past,  the  present,  or  the  future,  v 
or  to  any  particular  event  or  series  of  events  in  church  or 
world  history,  either  in  time  or  at  the  end  of  time. 

We  believe  that  the  apostle  John  was  more  nearly  a  poet 
and  a  philosopher  than  any  other  of  the  twelve.  "Our 
author  is  a  poet,"  says  Porter,  "whether  consciously  or  not, 
since,  whether  taken  as  word-pictures  or  as  actualities  his 
visions  were  to  him,  as  they  are  to  us,  symbols  of  spiritual 
realities,  of  Christian  faith  and  hopes."  And  again :  "There 
was  something  of  a  poet  in  the  apocalyptical  seer.  He  was 
seldom  simply  a  scribe  and  a  literalist."^*  We  believe  that 
John  saw  into  the  heart  of  things.  He  had  a  most  ex- 
traordinary gift  of  loving  intuition.  He  always  was  more 
interested  in  the  underlying  principles  of  things  than  he 
was  in  any  surface  facts.  In  the  fourth  Gospel  we  saw 
how  John  went  deeper  than  the  synoptics  into  the  heart 
of  the  beginnings  of  Christian  history  and  how  he  gave  us 
a  spiritual  interpretation  of  the  mysteries  of  the  Messianic 
career.  In  the  First  Epistie  we  found  him  interested  in 
the  broad  and  general  principles  of  Christian  conduct  and 
their  application  to  specific  cases  was  left  to  the  individuals 
concerned.  So  now  in  the  Apocalypse,  upon  the  basis  of 
visions  divinely  granted  him,  he  has  wrought  out  in  epic 
grandeur  a  panorama  of  the  great  principles  which  have 
controlled,  and  do  control,  and  forever  will  control  all 
history.  These  principles  have  displayed  themselves,  and 
do  display  themselves,  and  will  display  themselves  in  various 

**  Hastings's  Bible  Dictionary,  vol.  iv,  pp.  248,  265. 


28o  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

forms.  The  Preterist  is  right  in  thinking  that  some  of 
these  principles  have  been  seen  in  events  which  are  past. 
Some  of  these  apocalyptic  figures,  great  panoramic  pictures 
of  the  principles  which  are  in  continuous  conflict  through 
all  time,  great  dramas  of  spiritual  victories  and  fiendish 
defeat,  have  had  their  partial  if  not  final  fulfillment  again 
and  again  in  Christian  history;  and  what  has  been  true 
of  them  in  the  past  is  true  of  them  now  and  will  be  true  of 
them  again  and  again  in  the  future  days. 

Dr.  Vaughan,  in  his  Lectures  on  the  Revelation,  in  dis- 
cussing the  apocalyptic  language  of  Jesus  and  John,  says: 
"These  words  are  wonderful  in  all  senses,  not  least  in  this 
sense  that  they  are  manifold  in  their  accomplishment. 
Wherever  there  is  a  little  flock  in  a  waste  wilderness ;  wher- 
ever there  is  a  church  in  a  world ;  wherever  there  is  a  power 
of  unbelief,  ungodliness,  and  violence,  throwing  itself  upon 
Christ's  faith  and  Christ's  people,  and  seeking  to  overbear, 
and  to  demolish,  and  to  destroy:  whether  that  power  be 
the  power  of  Jewish  bigotry  and  fanaticism,  as  in  the  days 
of  the  first  disciples ;  or  of  pagan  Rome,  with  its  idolatries 
and  its  cruelties,  as  in  the  days  of  John  and  of  the  Revela- 
tion; or  of  papal  Rome,  with  its  lying  wonders  and  its 
anti-Christian  assumptions,  in  ages  later  still ;  or  of  open 
and  rampant  atheism,  as  in  the  days  of  the  first  French 
Revolution;  or  of  a  subtler  and  more  insidious  infidelity, 
like  that  which  is  threatening  now  to  deceive,  if  it  were 
possible,  the  very  elect ;  wherever  and  whatever  this  power 
may  be — and  it  has  had  a  thousand  forms,  and  may  be 
destined  yet  to  assume  a  thousand  more — then,  in  each  suc- 
cessive century,  the  words  of  Christ  to  his  first  disciples 
adapt  themselves  afresh  to  the  circumstances  of  his  strug- 
gling servants;  warn  them  of  danger,  exhort  them  to 
patience,  arouse  them  to  hope,  assure  them  of  victory ;  tell 
of  a  near  end  for  the  individual  and  for  the  generation; 
tell  also  of  a  far  end,  not  forever  to  be  postponed,  for 
time  itself  and  for  the  world;  predict  a  destruction  which 


THE  APOCALYPSE  281 

shall  befall  each  enemy  of  the  truth,  and  predict  a  destruc- 
tion which  shall  befall  the  enemy  himself  whom  each  in 
turn  has  represented  and  served ;  explain  the  meaning  of 
tribulation,  show  whence  it  comes,  and  point  to  its  swallow- 
ing up  in  glory ;  reveal  the  moving  hand  above,  and  disclose, 
from  behind  the  cloud  which  conceals  it,  the  clear  definite 
purpose  and  the  unchanging  loving  will.  Thus  understood, 
each  separate  downfall  of  evil  becomes  a  prophecy  of  the 
next  and  of  the  last;  and  the  partial  fulfillment  of  our 
Lord's  words  in  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  or  of  John's 
words  in  the  downfall  of  idolatry  and  the  dismemberment 
of  Rome,  becomes  itself  in  turn  a  new  warrant  for  the 
church's  expectation  of  the  Second  Advent  and  of  the  day 
of  judgment."^^ 

John  primarily  had  in  mind  the  conditions  of  his  own  V 
day,  the  conflict  then  waging,  and  the  judgment  then  sure. 
His  symbols  refer  in  the  first  instance  to  these:  but  they 
are  not  exhausted  in  their  first  application.  History  has 
fulfilled  them  again  and  again.  History  repeats  itself  in 
many  ways.  There  was  a  close  parallel  between  the  heathen 
arrogance  and  antagonism  of  the  C3esar-v>^orship  in  Asia 
Minor  in  John's  day  and  the  tyrannies  and  impostures  and 
persecutions  of  papal  Rome  in  later  days.  The  Protestants 
could  show  good  reason  for  their  application  of  the  Apoca- 
lyptic symbols  to  the  exactions  and  the  anti-Christian  prac- 
tices of  the  priesthood  and  the  pope. 

There  was  a  judgment  day  upon  pagan  Rome:  and  the 
ancient  world  with  its  idolatries  came  to  an  end  and  a  new 
world  freed  from  heathen  superstitions  took  its  place. 
There  was  a  judgment  day  upon  papal  Rome;  and  it  was 
deposed  from  its  high  seat  of  power  and  the  day  of  its 
exclusive  sovereignty  came  to  an  end ;  and  a  new  era  of 
intellectual  liberty  and  of  religious  freedom  dawned  on 
the  race.     There  was  a  judgment  day  in  France,  and  the 

»*  P.  170. 


282  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

heartless  extravagance  of  the  aristocratic  classes  at  last 
was  called  to  account,  and  in  the  French  Revolution  that 
condition  of  affairs  in  which  their  iniquity  had  flourished 
came  to  an  end  and  modern  Democracy  was  born  in  its 
funeral  flames.  Another  judgment  day  is  set  in  all  Europe 
now  and  militarism  is  doomed  and  a  new  social  revolution 
is  well  on  its  way.  After  the  great  war,  in  Europe  and 
America  and  in  all  the  world  the  predatory  rich  must  give 
an  account  of  their  methods  and  the  downtrodden  poor 
must  be  granted  their  rights :  and  there  will  be  an  end  of 
the  old  order  of  things  and  there  will  be  a  new  earth  in 
which  righteousness  reigns. 

In  all  these  succeeding  cycles  of  church  and  world  his- 
tory the  symbols  of  John's  Apocalypse  find  new  realization. 
Their  first  application  broadens  out  into  greater  significance 
and  finds  completer  fulfillment,  and  their  eternal  verity 
becomes  increasingly  apparent  as  the  centuries  roll  by. 
John  must  have  had  some  sense  of  this  fact  when  he 
opened  his  book  with  such  a  sweeping  promise  to  those 
who  read  it  and  heard  it,  and  closed  it  with  such  a  sweep- 
ing curse  upon  those  who  added  to  it  or  took  from  it  any- 
thing at  all. 

Irenaeus  suggested  that  the  name  of  the  beast  might  be 
Aarelvog^^  representing  the  Latin  or  Roman  empire.  This 
solution  of  the  puzzle  has  been  adopted  by  Hippolytus, 
Bellarmin,  Eichhorn,  Bleek,  De  Wette,  Ebrard,  Diister- 
dieck,  Alford,  Wordsworth,  Lee,  and  others.  Then  the 
Protestants  went  a  step  farther  and  declared  that  this  name 
of  the  beast  might  stand  for  the  papal  power  or  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire  as  well.  Luther,  Vitringa,  Bengel,  Auber- 
len,  Hengstenberg,  Ebrard,  and  others  held  this  view. 

Dean  Alford  agrees  in  giving  it  the  double  signification. 
He  says,  "This  name  describes  the  common  character  of 
the  rulers  of  the  former  Pagan  Roman  Empire;  and,  what 

MX  =  30  +  o  =  i+T  =  300  4-<=5-l-t=lo-l->'  =  50  +  o  =  70  4-o-  =  200 = 
total  666. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  283 

Irenaeus  could  not  foresee,  unites  under  itself  the  character 
of  the  later  Papal  Roman  Empire  also,  as  revived  and 
kept  up  by  the  agency  of  its  false  prophet,  the  priesthood. 
The  Latin  Empire,  the  Latin  Church,  Latin  Christianity, 
have  ever  been  its  commonly  current  appellations:  its  lan- 
guage, civil  and  ecclesiastical,  has  ever  been  Latin:  its 
public  services,  in  defiance  of  the  most  obvious  requisite  for 
public  worship,  have  ever  been  throughout  the  world  con- 
ducted in  Latin ;  there  is  no  one  word  which  could  so  com- 
pletely describe  its  character,  and  at  the  same  time  unite 
the  ancient  and  the  modern  attributes  of  the  two  beasts, 
as  this.  Short  of  saying  absolutely  that  this  was  the  word 
in  John's  mind,  I  have  the  strongest  persuasion  that  no 
other  can  be  found  approaching  so  near  to  a  complete 
solution."^'^  It  is  the  double  solution,  the  proof  of  manifold 
fulfillment  in  history,  which  leads  him  to  this  certainty  of 
conclusion. 

John's  inspiration  is  as  apparent  in  this  as  in  anything 
else.  He  was  little  concerned  about  any  temporal  phe- 
nomena. He  was  interested  in  eternal  principles.  He  was 
the  great  prophet  of  the  New  Testament  times;  but  at  the 
same  time  he  was  the  great  poet  and  philosopher  of  the 
early  church.  His  deep  insight  gave  him  great  foresight; 
but  the  foresight  of  the  Apocalypse  is  not  so  much  that  of 
particular  events  or  actual  things  as  it  is  an  ideal  unfolding 
of  the  general  principles  which  would  be  active  in  all  future 
time.  This  book  is  a  book  of  visions;  it  "requires  for  its 
interpretation  some  measure  of  idealistic  power."  These 
men  who  have  turned  the  book  into  a  time-table  and  have 
figured  out  prophetic  forecasts  of  church  and  world-history 
which  they  insist  we  shall  accept  without  question  as  a 
divine  revelation,  given  of  God  through  the  apostle  John 
as  interpreted  by  them,  these  are  the  men  who  have  brought 
this  book  into  a  disrepute  it  does  not  deserve. 


^  Compare  Schaff,  op.  cit.,  pp.  844,  845. 


284  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

The  Apocalypse  is  no  almanac  of  dates.  It  is  no  chart 
of  consecutive  events.  It  is  a  book  of  poetic-prophetic 
revelation,  of  beautiful  symbolism,  of  magnificent  imagery, 
of  eternal  principles,  of  divine  truth.  Says  Weiss,  "From 
the  religious  point  of  view  it  is  a  kind  of  philosophy  of 
history  to  which  Apocalyptic  prophecy  gives  birth,  though 
not  in  the  form  of  calm  reflection,  but  in  imaginative  intui- 
tion."9s  We  believe,  therefore,  that  the  ideal  commentator 
upon  the  Apocalypse  will  be  a  deeply  emotional  and  reli- 
gious philosopher,  a  philosopher  not  so  shallow  as  to  be 
prosy  in  his  style  and  his  outlook,  but  profound  enough  to 
be  poetic  in  his  insight  and  prophetic  in  his  intuition.  We 
need  a  John  to  interpret  John.  From  the  devotional  stand- 
point Christina  Rossetti  comes  nearest  the  apostle  in  her 
religious  fervor  and  her  poetic  power.^^  Robert  Browning 
would  have  made  a  magnificent  commentator  upon  the 
Apocalypse. 

For  the  correct  interpretation  of  this  book  we  would 
prescribe  the  following  general  principles:  i.  The  scope  of 
the  book  in  its  primary  and  secondary  fulfillments  covers 
the  whole  of  the  Christian  era,  from  the  first  coming  to  the 
last  coming  and  the  final  triumph  of  the  Lord.  Its  his- 
torical horizon,  very  definite  and  limited  in  John's  own 
day,  may  be  an  ever  shifting  and  an  ever  advancing  one  as 
the  successive  ages  roll  by;  but  these  two  great  events,  the 
first  and  second  coming  of  the  Lord,  are  the  two  limits 
within  which  the  whole  action  lies.  2.  The  book  is  chiefly 
concerned  with  the  setting  forth  of  the  great  principles,  in 
view  of  which  the  church  is  to  preserve  its  patience  and 
make  persistent  preparation  for  the  ultimate  triumph  of 
its  faith.  It  ought  to  be  studied  as  apocalypse  rather  than 
^  prophecy,  not  for  the  discovery  of  successive  future  events 
but  for  the  unfolding  of  the  principles  and  powers  under- 
lying and  overshadowing  all  events  from  the  beginning;  to 

98  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  vol.  ii,  p.  62. 

"  See  her  devotional  commentary,  The  Face  of  the  Deep. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  285 

the  end.  3.  The  visions  of  this  book  are  symbolical ;  their 
interpretation  ought  to  be  spiritual;  the  best  interpreter 
will  combine  within  himself  the  powers  of  the  prophet, 
poet,  and  philosopher,  the  powers  of  abstraction,  intuition, 
and  imagination.  4.  The  symbols  of  the  book  are  capable 
of  manifold  fulfillment.  No  single  series  of  events  will 
exhaust  their  meaning.  Having  decided  their  primary 
application,  the  way  is  open  to  a  study  of  their  significance 
in  the  light  of  all  history. 

XIV.    General  Characteristics 

The  reasons  for  these  principles  of  interpretation  will 
be  more  apparent,  if  we  glance  at  the  general  characteristics 
of  the  book. 

I.  First  among  these  we  notice  its  dependence  upon  the 
visions  and  the  prophecies  and  the  phraseology  of  the 
Old  Testament  for  both  the  subject  matter  and  the  formal 
setting  of  its  thought.  We  are  reminded  of  the  parallel 
visions  in  Ezekiel  when  we  read  in  the  fourth  chapter 
of  the  four  living  creatures  and  the  sealed  book;  in  the 
tenth  chapter,  of  the  little  book  to  be  eaten ;  in  7.  3  and  9.  4, 
of  the  sealing  on  the  forehead  of  the  servants  of  God;  in 
20.  8,  of  Gog  and  Magog  and  the  armies  they  gather  to- 
gether; in  II.  I  and  21.  15,  of  the  measuring  of  the  temple 
of  God  and  the  city  of  gold;  and  in  22.  i,  the  river  of  life 
with  its  unfailing  fullness  and  its  banks  with  trees  filled 
with  foliage  and  fruit.  The  weird  and  wonderful  visions 
of  Ezekiel,  unique  in  the  Old  Testament,  reappear  here  in 
the  Apocalypse.  They  belong  now  to  the  church  of  the 
new  covenant  as  well  as  to  the  church  of  the  old  dispensa- 
tion. 

There  are  fully  as  many  parallels  with  the  book  of  Daniel. 
Notice  among  others,  in  i,  i,  the  sending  of  the  angel;  in 
10.  6,  the  swearing  of  the  angel;  in  12.  7,  Michael  the 
archangel;  in  i.  13,  the  name  and  the  description  of  the 


286  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Son  of  man;  in  13.  i,  the  beast  with  his  many  heads  and 
horns;  in  19.  20,  the  lake  of  fire.  There  are  forty-five 
references  to  the  book  of  Daniel  in  the  Apocalypse. 
Stalker  thinks  that  the  apostle  John  must  have  had  the  book 
of  Daniel  with  him  on  the  island  of  Patmos,  and  that  he 
must  have  been  reading  and  studying  it  on  that  Lord's  Day 
when  the  Spirit  came  upon  him  and  these  visions  were 
given  him.  We  think  it  is  just  as  likely  that  he  had  the 
entire  Old  Testament:  and  if  he  did  not  happen  to  have  it 
in  his  hand  that  day,  we  know  that  he  had  it  in  his  heart 
always. 

There  is  no  direct  quotation  of  the  Old  Testament  any- 
where in  this  book;  not  one!  Yet  the  mental  equipment 
and  the  literary  furnishing  of  the  writer  of  the  Apocalypse 
evidently  is  based  wholly  upon  the  Old  Testament.  There 
are  reminiscences  of  its  sayings  everywhere.  Dr.  Terry 
said,  "There  is  scarcely  a  vision  or  symbol  in  the  whole 
book  which  is  not  to  some  extent  modeled  after  something 
similar  in  the  Old  Testament."  Milligan,  in  his  Lectures 
on  the  Revelation  of  John,  goes  even  farther  than  this,  and 
asserts,  "It  may  be  doubted  whether  it  contains  a  single 
figure  not  drawn  from  the  Old  Testament,  or  a  single  com- 
plete sentence  not  more  or  less  built  up  of  materials  brought 
from  the  same  source."  See,  for  instance,  Balaam,  Jezebel, 
Michael,  Abaddon,  Jerusalem,  Mount  Zion,  Babylon,  the 
Euphrates,  Sodom,  Egypt,  Gog,  and  Magog.  Similarly, 
the  tree  of  life,  the  scepter  of  iron,  the  potter's  vessels, 
the  morning  star.  Heaven  is  described  under  the  figure 
of  a  tabernacle  in  the  wilderness.  The  song  of  the  redeemed 
is  the  song  of  Moses.  The  plagues  of  Egypt  appear  in 
the  blood,  fire,  thunder,  darkness,  and  locusts. 

"The  great  earthquake  of  chapter  six  is  taken  from 
Haggai;  the  sun  becoming  black  as  sackcloth  of  hair  and 
the  moon  becoming  blood,  from  Joel;  the  stars  of  heaven 
falling  as  a  scroll,  from  Isaiah;  the  scorpions  of  chapter 
nine,  from  Ezekiel ;  the  gathering  of  the  vine  of  the  earth. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  287 

from  Joel ;  and  the  treading  of  the  wine-press  in  the  same 
chapter,  from  Isaiah."  So  too  the  details  of  a  single  vision 
are  gathered  out  of  different  prophets  or  different  parts  of 
the  same  prophet.  For  instance,  the  vision  of  the  glorified 
Redeemer,  i.  12-20.  The  golden  candlesticks  are  from 
Exodus  and  Zechariah ;  the  garment  down  to  the  foot,  from 
Exodus  and  Daniel ;  the  golden  girdle  and  the  hairs  like 
wool,  from  Isaiah  and  Daniel ;  the  feet  like  burnished  brass 
and  the  voice  like  the  sound  of  many  waters,  from  Ezekiel ; 
the  two-edged  sword,  from  Isaiah  and  Psalms;  the  coun- 
tenance like  the  sun,  from  Exodus ;  the  falling  of  the  seer 
as  dead,  from  Exodus,  Isaiah,  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel ;  the 
laying  of  Jesus'  right  hand  on  the  seer,  from  Daniel. 

"Not,  indeed,  that  the  writer  binds  himself  to  the  Old 
Testament  in  a  slavish  spirit.  He  rather  uses  it  with 
great  freedom  and  independence,  extending,  intensifying, 
or  transfiguring  its  descriptions  at  his  pleasure.  Yet  the 
main  source  of  his  emblems  cannot  be  mistaken.  The 
sacred  books  of  his  people  had  been  more  than  familiar  to 
him.  They  had  penetrated  his  whole  being.  They  had 
lived  with  him  as  a  germinating  seed,  capable  of  shooting 
up  not  only  in  the  old  forms,  but  in  new  forms  of  life  and 
beauty.  In  the  whole  extent  of  sacred  and  religious  litera- 
ture there  is  to  be  found  nowhere  else  such  a  perfect 
fusion  of  the  revelation  given  to  Israel  with  the  mind  of 
one  who  would  either  express  Israel's  ideas,  or  give  utter- 
ance, by  means  of  the  sym^bols  supplied  by  Israel's  history, 
to  the  present  and  most  elevated  thoughts  of  the  Christian 
faith."io« 

John's  spirit  and  style  are  saturated  with  the  influence 
of  the  Old  Testament  images  and  allusions,  language  and 
thought.  Diisterdieck  declares  that  there  is  no  other  New 
Testament  book  which  is  so  Old  Testamental  in  tone.'^''^ 


'<"•  The  above  quotations  and  condensations  from  Milligan  found  in 
Vincent's  Word  Studies,  vol.  ii,  pp.  450,  451. 
wi  Meyer's  Commentary,  p.  64. 


288  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

In  Westcott  and  Hort's  Appendix  to  the  Greek  New  Testa- 
ment a  table  is  given/^^  which  shows  that  in  the  four  hun- 
dred and  four  verses  of  the  Apocalypse  there  are  about 
two  hundred  and  sixty-five  which  contain  Old  Testament 
language  and  about  five  hundred  and  fifty  references  are 
made  in  them  to  Old  Testament  passages.i*^^ 

An  examination  of  these  references  shows  that  in  pro- 
portion to  its  length  John  has  made  more  use  of  the  book 
of  Daniel  than  of  any  other  of  the  Old  Testament  books. 
More  than  half  of  his  Old  Testament  references  are  to 
the  Psalms,  Isaiah,  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel.  Next  in  frequency 
of  use  come  Genesis,  Exodus,  Deuteronomy,  Jeremiah, 
Joel,  and  Zechariah.  He  uses  every  book  of  the  Law, 
Judges,  I  and  2  Samuel,  i  and  2  Kings,  Proverbs,  the 
Song  of  Songs,  Job,  all  of  the  major  prophets  and  seven 
of  the  minor  prophets.  He  evidently  knew  his  Bible  from 
cover  to  cover.  The  names  of  God  in  the  Apocalypse  are 
all  Old  Testament  names.  There  is  no  "Abba,  Father"  in 
this  book:  but  "the  Lord  God  Almighty"  and  "the  Lord 
God  of  the  holy  prophets."  There  is  a  sense  in  which  the 
Apocalypse  is  not  an  original  production.  It  is  made  up 
of  visions  and  teachings  of  an  earlier  date. 

2,  We  notice  as  a  second  characteristic  of  the  Apocalypse, 
the  unity  and  symmetry,  the  beauty  and  power  of  its 
composition.  Weiss  speaks  of  "its  fullness  of  dramatic 
life"  and  "wealth  of  poetic  imagery."!*^*  Jiilicher  mentions 
the  "erhahenen  Ausdruck,"  the  elevated  expression,  and 
"das  Grossartige,"  the  great  and  grand  in  this  half  prophetic 
and  half  poetic  literature.^^^  Donald  Eraser  says:  "The 
book  is  most  carefully  constructed,  curiously  wrought, 
nicely  arranged,  and  skillfully  balanced.  ...  It  has  a  per- 


102  Pp.  184-188. 

'03  Hastings's  Bible  Dictionary,  vol.  iv,  p.  254.     Compare  Swete, 
p.  cxxxv. 

'"^  Introduction  to  the  New  Testament,  p.  64. 
i"5  Einleitung,  p.  162. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  289 

feet  internal  order  and,  if  one  may  use  such  an  expression, 
artistic  symmetry,  .  .  .  Only  the  most  careless  reader  can 
suppose  the  book  to  be  tangled  or  confused.  It  is  a  master- 
piece of  construction,  fitted  and  bound  together  by  wisdom 
from  above."^'^^  Milligan  declares,  "No  book  probably 
ever  proceeded  from  the  pen  of  man  all  the  parts  of  which 
were  so  closely  interlaced  with  one  another."  Holtzmann 
affirms,  "Its  inner  unity  is  the  foundation  of  all  more 
recent  work  on  the  Apocalypse." 

However,  many  attempts  have  been  made  in  the  last 
half-century  to  prove  that  this  book  is  a  compilation  from 
different  written  sources  or  a  revision  by  a  Christian  hand 
of  a  Jewish  Apocalypse,  or  several  Jewish  Apocalypses,  of 
an  earlier  date.  Many  combinations  of  previous  sources  have 
been  suggested,  but  a  half  century  of  such  effort  has  made 
it  clear  that  the  critics  can  come  to  no  agreement  among 
themselves  at  this  point.  No  man  has  been  able  to  furnish 
convincing  proof  that  his  analysis  of  the  contents  of  the 
Apocalypse  into  its  component  sources  or  elements  is  a 
self-evidencing  or  a  legitimate  one.  Vogel,  Volter,  Vischer, 
Weyland,  Weizsacker,  Spitta,  Simcox,  Briggs,  and  others 
have  proposed  elaborate  schemes  of  dismemberment;  but 
the  general  feeling  at  present  seems  to  be  one  of  reaction 
against  such  treatment,  together  with  a  growing  sense  of 
the  literary  beauty  and  unity  of  composition  in  the  book. 
These  are  recognized  by  Weizsacker,  Sabatier,  Jiilicher, 
Gunkel,  Bousset,  Scott,  Moffatt,  and  others,  even  while 
most  of  these  feel  sure  that  John  has  incorporated  in  his 
book  certain  portions  of  previous  works.  We  agree  with 
E.  A,  Abbott,  who  concludes,  "Its  peculiarities  stamp  the 
whole  work — barring  a  few  phrases — as  not  only  conceived 
by  one  mind  but  also  written  by  one  hand,"^^'^  and  with 
Moffatt,  who  declares,  "The  Apocalypse  is  neither  a  liter- 


'"« Lectures  on  the  Bible,  vol.  ii,  pp.  327,  322. 
""  Diatessarica,  2942. 


290  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

ary  conglomerate  nor  a  mechanical  compilation  of  earlier 
shreds  and  patches.  There  is  sufficient  evidence  of  homo- 
geneity in  style  and  uniformity  in  treatment  to  indicate  that 
one  mind  has  been  at  the  shaping  of  its  oracles  in  their 
extant  guise."^^^  This  seems  to  be  a  rather  grudging  ad- 
mission, but  an  admission  forced  by  the  facts. 

The  literary  unity  of  the  Apocalypse  is  a  most  surprising 
fact,  when  we  stop  to  think  of  it.  We  already  have  seen 
that  the  constituent  materials  of  the  book  are  drawn  largely 
from  various  sources  in  the  Old  Testament.  Surely,  great 
genius  was  required  to  weld  these  various  ingredients  to- 
gether into  such  literary  symmetry  and  into  a  single  product 
of  such  poetic  and  artistic  power.  This  is  the  highest  proof 
of  originality,  not  the  invention  of  absolutely  new  and  un- 
heard of  things,  but  the  transfiguration  of  old  materials  into 
higher  potencies  and  more  abundant  life  than  they  had 
known  before.  That  was  the  originality  of  Shakespeare, 
touching  up  and  working  over  the  plays  he  found  on  the 
boards  in  his  day.  The  plots  were  old,  the  characters  had 
been  seen  before;  but  they  were  given  new  and  immortal 
life  at  his  touch.  That  was  the  originality  of  Christ,  ful- 
filling every  jot  and  tittle  of  the  old  law,  but  filling  every 
letter  of  it  full  of  new  spirit  and  life.  That  was  the  origi- 
nality of  the  apostle  John  in  the  composition  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse. 

These  characteristics  we  have  mentioned  seem  very  puz- 
zling and  inconsistent  to  many  people.  This  literary  finish 
of  the  Apocalypse  seems  to  be  the  product  of  the  study 
or  the  cloister  and  hardly  to  be  expected  in  an  honest  record 
of  the  revelations  made  to  an  ecstatic  spirit,  hardly  such  as 
would  be  written  down  by  a  rapt  seer  as  he  was  borne  on 
from  vision  to  vision  of  things  beyond  the  veil.  Then  if 
these  are  in  reality  revelations  divinely  given,  why  should 
they  be  so  dependent  for  framework  and  phraseology  upon 


*o*  Expositor's  Greek  Testament,  vol.  v,  p.  291. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  291 

the  Old  Testament?  Could  not  angelic  messengers  reveal 
something  new  ?    Could  not  God  be  absolutely  original  ? 

The  answer  to  these  questions  is  clear  enough.  God  is 
unconditioned  as  to  the  subject  matter  or  the  manner  of 
his  revelation;  but  when  he  desires  to  make  a  revelation  to 
man  that  revelation  always  is  conditioned  by  the  human 
personality.  An  apocalyptic  vision  is  a  psychological 
phenomenon ;  it  is  conditioned  by  the  laws  of  the  mind.  A 
revelation  to  John  can  come  to  John  only  through  the  con- 
ceptions possible  to  him,  the  ideas  of  his  age  and  race,  the 
thought-materials  found  in  his  brain.  As  our  dreams  are 
made  up  of  combinations  of  conceptions  furnished  us  in 
our  waking  hours,  and,  however  weird  and  unusual  they 
may  be  in  combination,  every  material  constituent  of  them 
can  be  traced  back  to  something  which  we  have  seen  or 
heard  or  known  before;  so  in  the  divinely  granted  visions 
of  prophecy  and  apocalypse,  by  natural  means  as  far  as  the 
human  personality  is  concerned,  following  the  laws  of  the 
mind,  the  man,  still  human  and  never  for  a  moment  lifted 
out  of  the  laws  of  his  human  being,  is  given  to  know  new 
truth  through  images  already  familiar,  by  methods  which 
his  training  and  environment  make  possible,  in  conceptions 
necessarily  conditioned  by  his  individuality. 

Then  we  may  look  for  the  constituent  elements  of  these 
apocalyptical  visions  in  anything  John  has  read  or  seen, 
anything  which  has  come  into  his  own  previous  experience. 
( I )  Take  those  visions  of  14.  14-20  for  example :  "On  the 
cloud  I  saw  one  sitting  like  unto  a  son  of  man"  (14.  14). 
Had  not  John  heard  the  Master's  saying,  "Henceforth  ye 
shall  see  the  Son  of  man  .  .  .  coming  in  the  clouds  of 
heaven"  (Matt.  26.  64)?  Does  the  Lord  wait  for  the 
angel's  message  before  he  begins  to  reap  (14.  15)?  Had 
not  John  heard  his  Master  say,  "Of  that  day  [when  the 
harvest  of  the  earth  is  ripe]  knoweth  no  man,  .  .  .  neither 
the  Son,  but  the  Father"  (Mark  13.  32)  ?  Does  the  angel 
send  forth  his  sharp  sickle  to  gather  the  clusters  of  the 


292  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

vine  of  the  earth  (14.  18)  ?  Had  not  John  heard  the  Mas- 
ter say,  "The  reapers  are  angels"  (Matt.  13.  39)?  Here 
are  reminiscences  of  the  Master's  sayings  at  every  turn. 
The  whole  figure  of  the  vine  of  the  earth  may  have  been 
suggested  by  the  Lord's  discourse  concerning  the  vine  and 
its  branches  (John  15),  but  it  is  more  likely  that  Isaiah's 
great  parable-prophecy  concerning  the  vineyard  of  the  Lord 
of  hosts  (Isa.  5)  was  the  source  of  this  imagery. 

When  we  come  to  the  twentieth  verse,  however,  we  meet 
details  for  which  we  have  no  parallel  in  the  sayings  of 
Jesus  or  in  the  Old  Testament.  Where  did  John  get  this 
conception  of  blood  rising  to  the  bridles  of  the  horses? 
(2)  We  are  inclined  to  think  he  had  read  the  book  of 
Enoch,  for  there  we  find  the  picture,  "The  fathers  will 
be  smitten  with  their  sons  in  one  place  .  .  .  until  it  streams 
with  their  blood  like  a  river  .  .  .  and  the  horses  will  walk 
up  to  the  breast  in  the  blood  of  sinners,  and  the  chariot 
will  be  submerged  to  its  height"  (i.  3).  It  looks  as  if 
Jesus  and  Isaiah  and  Enoch  all  had  had  a  share  in  furnish- 
ing John  with  the  elements  of  this  vision. 

(3)  Dean  Stanley  is  sure  that  the  natural  scenery  at 
Patmos  has  had  its  influence  upon  the  Apocalypse.  He 
says:  "The  Discourses  of  the  Gospels  and  the  Epistles  of 
Paul  are  raised,  for  the  most  part,  too  far  above  the  local 
circumstances  of  their  time,  to  allow  of  more  than  a  very 
slight  contact  with  the  surrounding  scenery.  It  is  only 
when  the  teaching  assumes  a  more  directly  poetic  or  pic- 
torial form,  as  in  the  parables  of  the  Gospels,  or  the  Athe- 
nian speech  of  Paul,  that  the  adjacent  imagery  can  be  ex- 
pected to  bear  its  part.  But  this  is  precisely  what  we  might 
expect  to  find  in  the  Apocalypse.  The  'Revelation'  is  of 
the  same  nature  as  the  prophetic  visions  and  lyrical  psalms 
of  the  Old  Testament,  where  the  mountains,  valleys,  trees, 
storms,  earthquakes  of  Palestine  occupy  the  foreground 
of  the  picture,  of  which  the  horizon  extends  to  the  unseen 
world  and  the  remote  future. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  293 

"For  this  reason  I  had  always  eagerly  desired  to  visit 
the  island  of  Patmos.  I  was  not  disappointed.  The  stern 
rugged  barrenness  of  its  broken  promontories  .  .  .  and  the 
view  from  its  summit,  with  the  general  character  of  its 
scenery,  enter  into  the  figures  of  the  vision  itself. 

"John  stood  on  the  heights  of  Patmos  in  the  center  of 
a  world  of  his  own.  .  .  .  The  view  from  the  topmost  peak, 
or,  indeed,  from  any  lofty  elevation  in  the  island,  unfolds 
an  unusual  sweep,  such  as  well  became  the  'Apocalypse,' 
the  'unveiling'  of  the  future  to  the  eyes  of  the  solitary  seer. 
It  was  'a  great  and  high  mountain'  (21.  10),  whence  he 
could  see  things  to  come.  Above,  there  was  always  the 
broad  heaven  of  a  Grecian  sky;  sometimes  bright,  with 
its  'white  cloud'  (14.  14),  sometimes  torn  with  'lightnings 
and  thunderings,'  and  darkened  by  'great  hail'  (4.  3;  8.  7; 
II.  19;  16.  21),  or  cheered  with  'a  rainbow  like  unto  an 
emerald.'  .  .  .  Around  him  stood  the  mountains  and  the 
islands  of  the  Archipelago — 'every  mountain  and  island 
shall  be  moved  out  of  their  places'  (6.  14)  ;  'every  island 
fled  away,  and  the  mountains  were  not  found'  (12.  3,  9; 
16.  20). 

"At  his  feet  lay  Patmos  itself  like  a  huge  serpent,  its 
rocks  contorted  into  the  most  fantastic  and  grotesque  forms, 
which  may  well  have  suggested  the  'beasts'  with  many 
heads  and  monstrous  figures  (13.  i,  21;  17,  3),  the  'huge 
dragon,'  struggling  for  victory — a  connection  as  obvious 
as  that  which  has  often  been  recognized  between  the  strange 
shapes  on  the  Assyrian  monuments  and  the  prophetic  sym- 
bols in  the  visions  of  Ezekiel  and  Daniel.  When  he  stood 
'on  the  sand  of  the  sea'  (13.  i),  the  sandy  beach  at  the 
foot  of  the  hill,  he  would  see  these  strange  shapes  'rise  out 
of  the  sea'  (13.  i),  which  rolled  before  him. 

"(4)  When  he  looked  around,  above,  or  below,  'the  sea' 
would  always  occupy  the  foremost  place.  He  saw  'the  things 
that  are  in  the  Iieavens  and  in  the  earth  and  in  the  sea'  (5. 
13 ;  10.  6 ;  14.  7) .  The  angel  was  'not  to  hurt  the  earth  or  th^ 


294  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

sea'  (7.  1-3),  nor  'to  blow  on  the  earth  or  on  the  sea.'  'A 
great  mountain/  like  that  of  the  volcanic  Thera,  'as  it  were 
burning  with  fire/  was  to  be  'cast  into  the  sea'  (8.  8).  The 
angel  was  to  stand  with  his  right  foot  upon  the  sea,  and 
his  left  foot  on  the  earth'  (10.  2,  5,  8)  ;  'the  vial  was  to  be 
poured  out  upon  the  sea'  (16.  3)  ;  'the  millstone  was  cast 
into  the  sea'  (18.  21)  ;  'the  sea  was  to  give  up  the  dead 
which  were  in  it'  (20.  13)  ;  and  the  time  would  come  when 
this  wall  of  his  imprisonment,  which  girdled  round  the  deso- 
late island,  should  have  ceased ;  'there  shall  be  no  more  sea' 
(21.  i)."io9 

(5)  A  more  recent  writer  has  developed  the  volcanic 
theory  suggested  by  Stanley  in  considerable  detail. ^^^^  He 
thinks  that  the  tales  told  John  of  the  eruption  of  the  island 
volcano,  Santorin,  explain  the  pictures  of  Rev.  6.  12-17; 
8.  7-12;  9.  I,  17,  18;  16.  2-7,  17-21.  "Nothing  could  be 
more  like  the  pit  of  the  abyss  than  the  crater  of  this  volcano, 
and  nothing  better  fitted  to  suggest  demonic  agency  than 
the  smoke  darkening  sun  and  air,  the  sulphurous  vapors 
which  killed  the  fish  in  the  sea,  and  blinded  and  even  killed 
men,  the  masses  of  molten  rock  cast  up  and  falling  into 
the  sea  like  a  great  mountain  or  the  star  Wormwood,  the 
reddening  of  the  sea,  the  rise  and  the  disappearance  of 
islands."iii 

(6)  Farrar  thinks  that  the  markets  of  Ephesus,  "glitter- 
ing with  the  produce  of  the  world's  art,  and  the  Vanity  Fair 
of  Asia,  furnished  to  the  exile  of  Patmos  the  local  coloring 
of  those  pages  of  the  Apocalypse  in  which  he  speaks  of 
'the  merchandise  of  gold,  and  silver,  and  precious  stones, 
and  of  pearls,  and  fine  linen,  and  purple,  and  silk,  and 
scarlet,  and  all  thyine  wood,  and  all  manner  vessels  of 
ivory,  and  all  manner  vessels  of  most  precious  wood,  and 
of  brass,  and  iron,  and  marble,  and  cinnamon,  and  odors, 

^"8  Sermons  in  the  East,  pp.  268-270. 

"oj.  T.  Bent,  Nineteenth  Century,  pp.  813-821,  1888. 

*"  Hastings's  Bible  Dictionary,  vol.  iv,  p.  260. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  295 

and  ointment,  and  frankincense,  and  wine,  and  oil,  and 
fine  flour,  and  wheat,  and  beasts,  and  sheep,  and  horses, 
and  chariots,  and  slaves,  and  souls  of  men'  (18.  12,  13). "^^^ 

All  of  this  may  be  possible.  The  visions  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse may  owe  something  to  the  sights  in  the  city  of 
Ephesus,  the  volcanoes  and  earthquakes  of  Asia  Minor  and 
the  Archipelago,  the  appearance  of  the  ^gean  Sea,  and 
the  scenery  at  the  island  of  Patmos.  They  may  owe  some- 
thing to  what  John  had  read  in  previous  Apocalypses  or 
(7)  in  other  books,  such  as  Tobit  and  the  Psalms  of  Solo- 
mon. Moffatt  says,  "There  are  also  elements  akin  to 
Zoroastrian,  Babylonian,  Greek,  and  Egyptian  eschatology 
and  cosmology  not  altogether  derived  indirectly  from  the 
apocalyptical  channels  of  the  later  Judaism.''^^^  They  may 
contain  reminiscences  of  the  sayings  of  the  Master.  Yet 
the  chief  source  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Apocalypse  is  still 
to  be  found  (8)  in  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  Its 
language  is  so  palpably  dependent  upon  the  Old  Testament 
books,  because  it  is  a  revelation  given  John,  whose  daily 
diet  from  his  earliest  youth  had  been  these  same  Scriptures 
of  God.  If  this  revelation  had  been  given  to  Plato,  the 
images  and  allusions  in  it  would  have  been  Greek.  Given 
to  John,  it  is  Hebrew  in  spirit  and  its  formulation  is  in  the 
phrases  and  images  of  the  sacred  books  of  the  Hebrew  race. 

As  many  of  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament  doubt- 
less were  written  months  or  years  after  their  first  oral  pro- 
duction and  delivery,  these  visions  of  the  Apocalypse  doubt- 
less were  arranged  in  symmetrical  order  and  given  their 
careful  literary  finish  in  the  leisure  of  exile  or  official  retire- 
ment; and  they  are  not  the  product  of  the  moment  of 
ecstasy  and  revelation,  but  the  matured  memory  of  these 
put  into  writing  after  they  had  been  meditated  upon  until 
their  meaning  had  become  comparatively  clear.  Jiilicher 
says,  "Ein  in  der  Studirstube  gefertigtes  Kunstproduct  ist 

112  Life  and  Works  of  Paul,  p.  355. 
"s  Moffatt,  Introduction,  p.  493. 


296  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

auch  diese  Apokalypse,"  This  Apocalypse  is  a  product  of 
art,  polished  in  the  study  of  the  seer.^^^  Moffatt  agrees, 
"The  material  to  be  interpreted  includes  the  reflective  work- 
ing of  the  prophet's  mind  upon  a  previous  mental  condition, 
the  literary  presentment  (w^ith  some  expansions,  rearrange- 
ment and  embellishment)  of  w^hat  he  remembers  to  have 
seen  in  the  exalted  moments  of  rapture,  together  v^^ith  the 
impressions  produced  by  these  upon  his  later  conscious- 
ness."^^^  The  w^onder  of  it  all  is  that  John  has  succeeded 
in  putting  his  own  stamp  upon  materials  so  variously  com- 
piled. His  work  is  a  unit  and  it  has  the  stamp  of  genius 
throughout. 

3.  Having  noticed  its  literary  finish  and  dependence,  we 
come  to  a  third  characteristic  of  the  Apocalypse,  a  charac- 
teristic which  it  shares  with  the  book  of  Daniel  and  other 
apocalyptical  portions  of  the  Old  Testament.  From  begin- 
ning to  end  this  book  is  filled  with  religious  symbolism. 

(i)  First,  there  is  the  symbolism  of  numbers.  Seven  is 
the  sacred  number  among  the  Hebrews.  We  remember 
how  often  this  number  recurs  in  the  Old  Testament:  the 
Sabbath  on  the  seventh  day,  circumcision  after  seven  days, 
Hannah's  praise  that  the  barren  had  borne  seven  (i  Sam. 
2.  5),  the  blood  sprinkled  seven  times  before  the  veil  of 
the  sanctuary  (Lev.  4.  6,  17),  the  seven  days  of  consecra- 
tion (Lev.  8.  33),  purification  on  the  seventh  day  (Num. 
19.  12),  the  prophecy  that  enemies  shall  flee  in  seven  ways 
(Deut.  28.  7),  the  punishment  of  seven  times  more  plagues 
(Lev.  26.  21,  24,  28),  the  promise  of  sevenfold  vengeance 
(Gen.  4.  15),  the  seven  years  of  plenty  and  the  seven  years 
of  famine  in  Egypt  (Gen.  41.  53,  54),  the  Nile  smitten 
for  seven  days  (Exod.  7.  25),  Jericho  compassed  seven 
days  and  on  the  seventh  day  seven  times,  and  the  walls 
falling  at  the  signal  of  the  seven  priests  blowing  upon  the 


"<  Einleitung,  p.  168. 

"*  Expositor's  Greek  Testament,  vol.  v,  p.  300. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  297 

seven  trumpets  (Josh,  6.  3,  4),  Naaman  dipping  in  the 
Jordan  seven  times  (2  Kings  5.  10).  The  whole  system  of 
Jewish  feasts,  the  Passover,  the  Feast  of  Weeks,  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles,  the  Sabbath-year,  the  year  of  Jubilee,  was 
built  up  on  the  number  seven  and  its  multiples. 

This  sacred  number  is  carried  over  into  the  New  Testa- 
ment where  we  find  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  the  seven 
beatitudes,  and  the  seven  petitions  of  the  Lord's  Prayer, 
the  seven  successive  parables  of  the  Kingdom  in  Matt.  13, 
the  seven  words  from  the  cross,  the  seven  deacons  in  Jeru- 
salem, the  seven  gifts  of  grace  (Rom.  12.  6-8),  the  seven 
characteristics  of  wisdom  (James  3.  17).  But  it  is  in  the 
Apocalypse  that  the  symbolic  use  of  the  number  seven  be- 
comes most  apparent.  It  underlies  the  whole  construction 
of  the  book. 

There  are  seven  clear  divisions  in  the  Introduction  of  the 
first  chapter;  the  Inscription,  1-3;  the  Address,  4-6;  the 
Parousia,  7;  the  Attestator,  8;  the  conditions  of  composi- 
tion. Author,  Time,  and  Place,  9;  the  Vision,  10-16;  the 
Voice  or  the  Command,  17-20.  There  are  seven  descriptive 
statements  touching  the  Christophany ;  concerning  the 
clothmg,  girdle,  head,  hair,  eyes,  feet,  and  voice.  Also, 
there  are  seven  different  sayings  of  the  Living  One  him- 
self. Seven  characteristics  of  the  scourging  locusts  are 
mentioned.  We  are  sure  that  there  is  a  sevenfold  division 
of  the  book  as  a  whole.  Weiss  finds  that  there  are  seven 
distinct  visions  in  the  body  of  the  book.  There  are  seven 
beatitudes  in  the  Apocalypse:  i.  3;  14.  13;  19.  9;  20.  6; 
22.  7,  14. 

There  are  the  seven  churches,  the  seven  seals,  the  seven 
trumpets,  the  seven  vials,  the  seven  Spirits,  the  seven  stars, 
the  seven  candlesticks,  the  seven  lamps  of  fire,  the  seven 
horns  and  seven  eyes  of  the  Lamb,  the  seven  heads  of 
the  dragon  and  the  seven  heads  of  the  beast,  the  seven 
diadems,  the  seven  names  of  blasphemy,  the  seven  plagues, 
the  seven  angels,  the  seven  thunders,  the  seven  hills  of 


298  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

mystic  Babylon,  the  seven  kings,  the  seven  thousand  men. 
The  number  seven  occurs  fifty-four  times  in  the  book. 

We  are  told  that  the  number  seven  is  the  sacred  number, 
the  perfect  number,  the  number  of  completeness  or  rest; 
and  that  it  represents  the  Divine  or  the  perfectly  complete. 
Milligan  says,  "It  is  the  number  of  unity  in  diversity,  of 
unity  in  that  manifoldness  of  operation  which  alone  entitles 
it  to  the  name  of  unity."^^^  Upon  this  basis  he  goes  on 
to  declare  that  "the  seven  Spirits  of  God  are  his  one  Spirit; 
the  seven  churches,  his  one  church;  the  seven  horns  and 
the  seven  eyes  of  the  Lamb,  his  one  powerful  might  and 
his  one  penetrating  glance.  In  like  manner  the  seven  Seals, 
the  seven  Trumpets,  and  the  seven  Bowls  embody  the 
thought  of  many  judgments  which  are  yet  in  reality  one.''^^''' 

This  number  seven  sometimes  breaks  up  into  three  and 
four  or  four  and  three.  In  the  seven  epistles,  in  the  first 
three  the  exhortation,  "He  that  hath  an  ear,  let  him  hear 
what  the  Spirit  saith  to  the  churches,"  comes  in  the  middle 
of  the  letter,  and  in  the  last  four  it  comes  at  the  very  close. 
The  first  three  are  closer  to  the  Divine;  and  the  last  four 
are  closer  to  the  world.  In  the  first  four  seals,  a  rider 
appears  when  each  seal  is  broken;  in  the  breaking  of  the 
last  three  no  rider  appears  and  the  vision  passes  from  the 
visible  into  the  spiritual  world.  There  are  seven  seals,  and 
after  the  breaking  of  each  of  the  first  four  the  seer  is  sum- 
moned to  come  near,  but  in  the  last  three  this  summons 
fails.  The  seven  trumpets  are  distinguished  in  the  same 
two  groups,  and  the  last  three  are  expressly  called  Woes. 
The  first  four  affect  nature,  and  the  last  three  afifect  men. 
The  seven  bowls  fall  into  the  same  divisions;  the  plagues 
of  the  first  three  are  received  in  silence,  while  after  the 
pouring  forth  of  the  last  four  there  are  voices  and  blas- 
phemies and  unclean  spirits  from  the  mouths  of  God's  foes. 

We  read  that  the  broken  seven,  three  and  one  half,  is 

"6  Expositor's  Bible,  p.  28. 
1"  Op.  cit.,  p.  136. 


I 


THE  APOCALYPSE  299 

the  symbol  of  the  confusion  and  trouble  of  the  last  age; 
and  that  the  number  of  the  beast,  six  hundred  and  sixty-six, 
is  the  symbol  of  protracted  labor,  never  reaching  rest. 

The  number  four  is  the  cosmic  number,  the  number  of 
the  world  and  of  creation,  represented  in  the  Apocalypse 
by  the  four  living  creatures  of  4.  6,  and  the  four  angels 
and  four  winds  of  7.  i,  the  four  angels  of  death  in  9.  15, 
and  the  four-square  cube  of  the  New  Jerusalem. 

The  number  three  occurs  in  the  trinitarian  greeting  of 
I.  4,  the  three  woes  of  11.  14,  the  three  angels  of  14.  6,  the 
three  unclean  spirits  of  16.  13,  the  three  divisions  of  the 
great  city,  16.  19,  and  the  three  portals  in  each  wall  of  the 
heavenly  city. 

Ten  with  its  multiples  is  the  symbol  of  abundance.  It 
equals  1+2-I-3+4,  and  is  found  in  the  ten  days  of  tribula- 
tion (2.  10),  the  ten  horns  of  the  dragon  and  of  the  beast 
(13.  I  and  17.  3)  ;  and  the  millennium  (20.  4). 

Twelve  with  its  multiples  is  the  number  of  the  church, 
and  we  find  it  recurring  in  the  twelve  stars  in  the  woman's 
crown  (12.  i),  the  twelve  apostles,  the  twelve  foundations, 
the  twelve  gates  of  the  New  Jerusalem,  the  names  of  the 
twelve  tribes  upon  these  gates  and  the  twelve  angels  to 
guard  them  (chapter  21),  the  twelve  manner  of  fruits  on 
the  tree  of  life  (22.  2),  the  twenty- four  elders  (4.  4),  and 
the  one  hundred  and  forty-four  thousand  of  those  who 
were  sealed,  twelve  thousand  for  each  of  the  twelve  tribes 
of  Israel  (7.  i).  Each  side  of  the  heavenly  city  is  twelve 
thousand  furlongs  in  length,  and  its  wall  is  one  hundred 
and  forty-four  cubits  high. 

This  symbolism  in  the  use  of  numbers  is  so  plain  that 
it  cannot  be  denied;  and  the  moment  it  is  recognized  all 
attempts  to  figure  out  any  definite  dates  for  the  end  of  the 
world  or  the  millennium  or  the  great  tribulation  or  the 
second  coming  of  the  Lord  become  at  once  both  useless 
and  absurd.  The  Apocalypse  never  was  intended  to  serve 
as  an  Adventist's  almanac.     Its  figures  are  symbolic,  and 


300  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

do  not  represent  any  definite  dimensions  of  space  or  any 
definite  periods  of  time.  They  are  to  be  interpreted  as 
ideas,  and  are  not  to  be  disposed  of  by  a  school-boy's 
arithmetic. 

The  thousand  years  of  the  millennium  "express  no 
period  of  time.  They  are  not  a  figure  for  the  whole  Chris- 
tian era,  now  extending  to  more  than  nineteen  hundred 
years.  Nor  do  they  denote  a  certain  space  of  time,  longer 
or  shorter,  it  may  be,  than  the  definite  number  of  years 
spoken  of,  at  the  close  of  the  present  dispensation,  and  to 
be  in  the  view  of  some  preceded,  in  the  view  of  others 
followed,  by  the  second  Advent  of  our  Lord.  They  embody 
an  idea;  and  that  idea,  whether  applied  to  the  subjugation 
of  Satan  or  to  the  triumph  of  the  saints,  is  the  idea  of 
completeness  or  perfection.  Satan  is  bound  for  a  thousand 
years ;  that  is,  he  is  completely  bound.  The  saints  reign 
for  a  thousand  years ;  that  is,  they  are  introduced  into  a 
state  of  perfect  and  glorious  victory."!!^ 

Does  any  one  think  of  the  new  Jerusalem  as  a  real  city, 
fifteen  hundred  English  miles  long  and  fifteen  hundred 
miles  wide,  and  fifteen  hundred  miles  high?  John  says, 
"The  length  and  the  breadth  and  the  height  thereof  are 
equal,  twelve  thousand  furlongs  each.''^^^  Some  of 
the  commentators  have  tried  to  picture  it  as  a  city  built 
about  a  mountain  with  a  base  of  these  dimensions  and 
the  tiers  of  streets  and  houses  rising  to  that  height  on 
the  mountain  sides ;  but  that  is  not  John's  picture.  He 
makes  the  city  a  perfect  cube;  for  the  holy  place  in  the 
temple  at  Jerusalem  was  a  perfect  cube  and  it  was  the  place 
of  the  immediate  manifestation  of  God.  Every  part  of 
the  heavenly  city  would  be  equally  filled  with  the  revealed 
presence  of  the  Most  High.  It  was  to  be  a  holy  place 
throughout.  The  cube  symbolized  that,  and  its  size  sug- 
gested that  the  holy  city  would  be  one  of  almost  incredibly 

118  Milligan,  op.  cit.,  p.  337. 

"»2I.   16. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  301 

ample  proportions,  from  which  no  one  need  be  excluded 
for  lack  of  room. 

Does  anyone  think  that  a  real  city  seven  million  feet  in 
height  would  have  a  wall  about  it  only  two  hundred  and 
sixteen  feet  highP^^o  Such  a  wall  would  be  utterly  in- 
significant in  comparison  with  such  a  city.  These  are  only 
symbols ;  and  if  a  wall  about  a  city  was  a  symbol  of  defense 
there  was  no  need  of  even  the  most  insignificant  wall  about 
this  city.  God  was  its  sure  defense:  and  all  its  enemies 
had  been  overcome.  Were  its  gates  open  all  the  day 
and  was  there  no  night  there  ?^2i  xhe  open  gates  were 
the  symbol  of  perfect  security  and  peace.  All  danger  was 
at  an  end:  all  darkness  had  passed  away  for  evermore. 

Does  any  one  think  that  the  number  which  John  heard 
of  the  cavalry  which  served  the  four  angels  loosed  at  the 
Euphrates  is  to  be  taken  literally?  They  were  two  hundred 
million  in  number,  twice  ten  thousand  times  ten  thou- 
sand.^-2  The  number  symbolizing  abundance  was  multi- 
plied by  itself  until  the  sum  had  reached  an  inconceivable 
total.  Is  any  one  disposed  to  believe  that  when  the  great 
winepress  of  the  wrath  of  God  is  trodden  without  the 
city  there  will  flow  from  it  a  literal  river  of  blood  so  deep 
that  it  will  reach  to  the  bridles  of  the  horses  and  so  long 
that  it  will  extend  to  two  hundred  miles?  The  picture  is 
that  of  immeasurable  destruction,  a  punishment  thorough 
and  complete. 

Does  any  one  think  that  in  the  new  heaven  and  the  new 
earth  there  will  be  no  ocean  and  no  salt  sea,  because  John 
says,  "The  first  heaven  and  the  first  earth  are  passed  away ; 
and  the  sea  is  no  more"?i23  \Ye  would  sympathize  with 
the  wail  of  Kipling's  mariners,  if  that  were  true.  To 
John  the  sea  was  a  symbol  of  unrest,  of  storm  and  ship- 
wreck, and  of  separation.  He  looked  away  across  the 
troubled    waves    which    lashed    his    island    of    exile,    and 

120  21.  17.  122  Rev.  9.  16. 

121  21.  25.  123  21.    I. 


302  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

dreamed  of  the  good  time  coming  when  no  such  barrier 
would  keep  the  saints  of  God  from  the  enjoyment  of  com- 
munion with  each  other.  In  the  new  heaven  and  the  new 
earth  there  would  be  no  shipwrecks  and  there  would  be 
union  and  communion  and  perfect  peace. 

Where  do  the  waters  of  the  river  of  life  flow,  if  not 
into  the  sea  ?  How  could  the  renewed  earth  maintain  itself 
without  the  gracious  ministries  of  the  sea?  Do  not  the 
heavenly  victors  with  their  harps  of  gold  stand  by  the 
crystal  sea,  as  they  sing  the  song  of  Moses  and  the 
Lamb  ?^24  fj^g  gea  is  a  symbol  to  John,  now  of  the  spiritual 
barrenness  of  the  heathen  world,^^^  and  now  of  the  separat- 
ing barrier  between  brethren  beloved,^26  ^^d  now  again  of 
the  resplendent  glories  of  heaven. ^ 27 

He  had  stood  upon  some  cliff  at  Patmos  and  heard 
the  roar  of  the  breakers  as  they  shattered  themselves  upon 
the  rocks ;  and  in  his  visions  he  had  been  reminded  of  it, 
for  the  voice  of  his  risen  Lord  reverberated  through  all 
the  chambers  of  his  soul  even  as  that  sea  music  had,  and 
he  wrote  that  his  voice  was  as  the  voice  of  many  waters.^^s 
He  had  stood  upon  the  sandy  shore  and  looked  off  toward 
the  setting  sun,  until  the  reflected  glories  had  dazzled  his 
eyes  and  the  quiet  expanse  of  waters  had  burned  as  with  red 
flame  to  their  translucent  depths ;  and  when  he  came  to  see 
the  throne  of  God  there  stretched  between  him  and  it  that 
same  sea  as  of  glass,  clear  as  crystal,  and  mingled  with 
fire.^29  'phe  sea  is  a  symbol  of  sorrow  and  sin :  and  as 
such  the  time  is  coming  when  it  shall  be  no  more.  The 
sea  is  a  symbol  of  divine  majesty  and  of  the  unspeakable 
glories  of  heaven ;  and  as  such  it  has  an  abiding  place  in 
John's  visions  of  the  future  world. 

(2)  This  symbolism  in  the  Apocalypse  is  equally  appar- 
ent in  the  use  made  of  colors.    White  is  the  color  of  purity 

^  15.  2.  1"  15.  2. 

»^  13.    I.  128  I,    15. 

"«2I.  I.  i2»4.  6;   15.  2. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  303 

in  the  white  garments  of  the  redeemed;  of  righteousness 
as  well  as  purity  in  the  white  throne;  of  righteousness, 
purity,  and  victory  in  the  white  horse  of  the  Conqueror 
near  the  end  of  the  book.  Red  is  the  symbol  of  bloodshed ; 
purple,  of  imperial  power ;  black,  of  mourning  and  distress ; 
paleness,  of  fear. 

(3)  There  are  symbolic  creatures  all  through  the  book. 
The  living  creatures  of  the  fourth  chapter  symbolize  the 
redeemed  creation.  The  Lamb  is  the  symbol  of  the  Suf- 
ferer for  the  sins  of  the  world.  Frogs  represent  unclean 
spirits.  Locusts  are  the  symbols  of  all  things  which  waste 
and  destroy.  The  wild  beast  is  incarnated  cruelty,  an 
apotheosis  of  diabolical  power. 

(4)  There  are  symbolic  acts,  such  as  the  sealing  and 
the  unsealing,  the  blowing  of  trumpets,  and  the  pressing 
out  of  the  wine. 

(5)  "All  that  is  brilliant  in  nature — the  glitter  of  the 
sun  or  of  gold,  the  luster  of  precious  stones  or  of  pearls — 
becomes  an  emblem  of  the  divine  glory;  all  that  is  terrible 
in  nature — lightning  and  thunder,  the  roar  of  the  tempest 
and  the  whirlwind,  hail  and  earthquake — emblems  of  divine 
justice."^^*^  "The  horns  are  symbolical  of  power,  the  eyes 
of  omniscience,  the  diadem  of  supremacy,  garlands  and 
palms  of  victory,  incense  of  prayer." 

XV.    Salient  Features  of  Its  Teaching 

The  Apocalypse,  then,  is  a  book  full  of  poetic  imagery 
and  symbolism.  We  have  said  that  it  was  at  the  same 
time  a  book  of  profound  philosophy  and  full  of  religious 
truth.  Let  us  glance  at  some  of  the  salient  features  of 
its  teaching. 

I.  First  of  all  it  is  a  revelation  of  heavenly  powers. 
What  would  we  know  of  heaven  without  this  book?  The 
best  way  to  realize  the  value  of  a  book  is  to  think  how 

^  Weiss,  p.  65. 


^y 


304  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

much  we  would  lose  if  we  were  deprived  of  it.  We  would 
have  some  gleams  of  light  from  beyond  the  veil  without 
the  Apocalypse,  but  our  conceptions  of  the  heavenly  happi- 
ness and  home  would  be  very  misty  indeed.  Our  knowledge 
of  the  life  after  this  is  meager  enough  as  it  is,  but  without 
the  Apocalypse  it  would  be  much  more  meager  than  now. 
Heaven  would  have  seemed  far  removed  without  the  revela- 
tion of  this  book.  Now  we  know  that  heaven  is  very  near 
to  earth ;  and  the  gates  of  heaven  are  open ;  and  the  eternal 
interests  of  heaven  and  earth  are  seen  to  be  one. 

The  inhabitants  of  heaven  are  supremely  interested  in  the 
fortunes  and  fate  of  the  citizens  of  earth.  They  have  one 
book  to  study,  a  book  sealed  with  seven  seals,  and  each  seal 
represents  a  stage  of  development  in  the  advancing  history 
of  the  redemption  of  earth.  Heavenly  powers  pass  to  and 
fro  between  earth  and  heaven.  Spiritual  agencies  are 
active  in  shaping  the  course  of  things  and  determining  the 
final  outcome  of  events.  With  the  revelation  of  this  book 
the  eye  of  faith  can  see  the  whole  earth  filled  with  horses 
and  chariots  of  fire,  like  the  mountain  there  at  Dothan; 
and,  like  Elisha,  the  believing  soul  always  can  say,  "They 
that  are  with  us  are  more  than  they  that  are  with  them.''^^^ 
We  need  the  inspiration  of  this  revelation;  for  the  powers 
of  evil  assuredly  are  at  hand.  It  is  a  comfort  to  know 
that  the  powers  of  heaven  are  here  too;  and  in  our  hour 
of  greatest  need  they  are  pledged  to  intervene  in  our  behalf. 
Luther  did  not  much  like  the  Apocalypse:  but  even  he 
acknowledges  this  good  in  it.  He  said,  "We  need  not  doubt 
that  Christ  is  near  and  with  us,  even  if  matters  go  hardest; 
as  we  see  in  this  book  that  through  and  above  all  plagues, 
beasts,  evil  angels,  Christ  is  still  near  and  with  his  saints, 
and  at  last  overthrows  them." 

2.  In  the  second  place,  this  book  is  the  clearest  revelation 
in  the  Bible  of  the  essence  of  evil,  the  powers  of  evil,  and 

"'  2  Kings  6.  i6. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  305 

the  final  judgment  of  the  devil  and  sin.  Bishop  Warren 
has  told  us,  "Anyone  who  needs  to  realize  that  sin  is  a 
horrible,  ghastly,  hideous,  and  unnamable  thing,  that  has 
taxed  and  will  tax  the  highest  energies  of  the  universe  to 
manage  and  control  it,  will  find  his  needed  aid  in  this 
book."i22  Here  is  "the  wrath  of  God  and  the  Lamb  against 
it.  .  .  .  Our  age  has  weakened  on  the  vivid  idea  of  the 
Judgment.  Here  is  the  tonic.  .  .  .  See  the  plagues,  noi- 
some and  grievous  sores,  rivers  of  blood,  men  scorched 
with  fire,  gnawing  their  tongues  with  pain  as  they  blas- 
pheme God.  .  .  .  Perdition  and  damnation  welter  over 
these  pages,  for  sin  is  and  always  must  be  accursed. "^^^ 

It  is  a  characteristic  of  the  apostle  John's  style  that  he 
always  arranges  his  matter  into  antithetic  parallelism.  Over 
against  the  hosts  of  heaven  he  has  put  the  powers  of  hell 
in  this  book.  Over  against  the  adorable  and  Divine  Trinity 
he  has  placed  the  "Triad  of  Anti-Christianity,"  as  it  has 
been  called,  the  blasphemous  Trinity  of  the  pit.  He  gives 
us  the  two  sides  of  the  picture:  heaven  and  the  abyss,  the 
heavenly  city  and  the  harlot  city,  the  armies  of  the  saints 
and  the  armies  of  the  idolaters,  Michael  and  the  dragon, 
the  Spirit  of  truth  and  the  spirit  who  deceives,  the  Lamb 
and  the  wild  beast,  the  Father  of  lights  and  the  father  of 
lies. 

3.  We  scarcely  need  to  say,  in  the  third  place,  that  the 
Apocalypse  is  a  picture  of  ceaseless  conflict  between  these 
two.  The  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  with  their 
followers  are  on  the  one  side;  the  dragon,  the  wild  beast, 
and  the  false  prophet  with  their  followers  are  on  the  other. 
There  is  no  truce  between  these  hosts.  It  is  a  long  and 
desperate  struggle  which  John  sees  in  the  visions  of  this 
book,  a  struggle  which  he  pictures  in  war  and  desolation, 
famine  and  pestilence,  tempest  and  earthquake.  John  is 
a  Boanerges  here.     It  is  the  Son  of  Thunder  who  indites 

"2  Ihfif  School  Studies,  p.  38. 
1^  Idem.,  p.  37. 


3o6  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

these  magnificent  revelations.  De  Wette  said  that  it  was 
the  Old  Testament  spirit  of  wrath  and  punishment  which 
filled  the  book.  We  think  rather  that  it  is  an  appreciation 
of  the  eternal  truth  that  there  can  be  no  peace  nor  com- 
promise in  earth  or  heaven,  in  time  or  in  eternity,  between 
righteousness  and  unrighteousness,  light  and  darkness, 
Christ  and  Belial.  The  noun  "war"  occurs  in  the  Apoca- 
lypse nine  times  and  in  the  rest  of  the  New  Testament  only 
seven  times.  The  verb  "to  war"  occurs  in  this  book  six 
times;  and  in  the  rest  of  the  New  Testament  only  once.^^^ 

4.  We  want  to  say  next  that  the  conflict  of  this  book 
ends  in  glorious  victory  for  the  right  and  the  good.  Milton 
describes  the  book  as  "the  majestic  image  of  a  high  and 
stately  tragedy,  shutting  up  and  mingling  her  solemn  scenes 
and  acts  with  a  sevenfold  chorus  of  hallelujahs  and  harp- 
ing symphonies."  Dean  Farrar  has  written:  "It  is  a  book 
of  war,  but  the  war  ends  in  triumph  and  peace.  It  is  a  book 
of  thunder,  but  the  thunder  dies  away  into  liturgies  and 
psalms."  The  Lamb  in  this  book  is  a  Conqueror.  The 
followers  of  the  Lamb  at  last  are  Overcomers.  The  word 
is  characteristic  of  John's  usage.  It  is  found  once  in  the 
Gospel,  six  times  in  the  First  Epistle,  and  sixteen  times  in 
the  Apocalypse,  and  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament  only 
three  times.^^^  The  promises  of  this  book  are  made  to 
Overcomers  alone ;  the  realization  of  the  promises  is  enjoyed 
only  by  these.^^^  The  struggle  of  earth  is  followed  by 
triumph  in  heaven.  Christ  is  the  Great  Overcomer.  The 
redeemed  are  soldiers,  fighters,  Overcomers  too.  They 
have  faced  the  foe,  borne  the  toil,  endured  the  pain,  and 
conquered  in  the  glorious  war.  Here  all  the  armies  shine 
in  robes  of  victory  through  the  skies.  "The  panorama  of 
each  individual  that  overcometh  and  of  the  church  as  a 
whole  is  sketched  in  advance.     And  the  last  picture  is  of 

1^  James  4.  2. 

"5  Luke  II.  22;  Rom.  3.  4;  12.  21. 

"62.  7;  2.  II;  2.  17;  2.  26;  3.  5;  3.  12;  3.  21;  21.  7;  12.  II. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  307 

complete,   splendid,  unthinkably  glorious  and  eternal  vic- 
tory."i37 

5.  Shall  we  add  that  this  book  teaches  very  definitely 
that  this  final  triumph  is  made  possible  only  through  the 
shed  blood  of  the  Lamb?  The  doctrine  of  redemption  by 
blood  does  not  seem  to  have  been  revolting  to  John.  Saints 
sing  of  it.  Angels  speak  of  it.  Redemption,  cleansing, 
victory  is  all  through  the  blood. 

XVL     Hov;^  TO  Read  the  Apocalypse 

Now  let  us  recall  what  was  promised  there  in  i.  3, 
"Blessed  is  he  that  readeth,  and  they  that  hear  the  words 
of  the  prophecy,  and  keep  the  things  that  are  written  there- 
in." Let  us  read  this  book,  as  Dr.  Alexander  said  he  read 
it,  for  the  promised  and  realized  blessing;  though  he  did 
not  pretend  to  understand  it.  I  am  no  professional  astron- 
omer. I  know  very  little  indeed  of  the  mysteries  of  the 
heavens  above  me.  Yet  I  enjoy  the  starlight  and  moon- 
light and  sunlight  just  as  surely  as  if  I  understood  all  about 
them.  I  walk  beneath  the  stars  until  their  light  breaks  in 
upon  my  soul ;  I  stand  beneath  the  silent  heavens  until  their 
peace  fills  my  heart.  I  am  blessed  by  communion  with 
these  things  on  high,  even  though  I  do  not  comprehend 
them. 

You  remember  Victor  Hugo's  picture  of  the  good  bishop 
in  his  garden  at  night:  "He  was  there  alone  with  himself, 
collected,  tranquil,  adoring,  comparing  the  serenity  of  his 
heart  with  the  serenity  of  the  skies,  moved  in  the  darkness 
by  the  visible  splendors  of  the  constellations,  and  the  in- 
visible splendor  of  God,  opening  his  soul  to  the  thoughts 
which  fall  from  the  Unknown.  In  such  moments,  offering 
up  his  heart  at  the  hour  when  the  flowers  of  night  exhale 
their  perfume,  lighted  like  a  lanip  in  the  center  of  the  starry 
night,  expanding  his  soul  in  ecstasy  in  the  midst  of  the 

^  Bishop  Warren,  op.  cit.,  p.  36. 


4 


3o8  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

universal  radiance  of  creation,  he  could  not  himself  per- 
haps have  told  what  was  passing  in  his  own  mind;  he  felt 
something  depart  from  him,  and  something  descend  upon 
him;  mysterious  interchanges  of  the  depths  of  the  soul 
with  the  depths  of  the  universe.  He  contemplated  the 
grandeur  and  the  presence  of  God ;  the  eternity  of  the 
future,  strange  mystery;  the  eternity  of  the  past,  mystery 
yet  more  strange;  all  the  infinities  deep  hidden  in  every 
direction  about  him ;  and,  without  essaying  to  comprehend 
the  incomprehensible,  he  saw  it."^^^ 

It  is  exactly  in  this  spirit  that  I  would  read  the  Apoca- 
lypse. Here  are  infinite  depths,  heavenly  splendors,  daz- 
zling revelations  of  truth ;  strange  mysteries  of  eternity 
future  and  eternity  past ;  incomprehensible,  but  incom- 
parably blessed.  The  chapters  of  this  book  are  like  the 
heaven  studded  with  stars;  in  their  presence  I  am  exalted, 
quieted,  comforted,  made  a  partaker  in  the  tribulation  and 
kingdom  and  patience  which  are  in  Jesus,  my  Lord.  This 
book  is  a  perfect  arsenal  of  inspiration  for  the  sturdily 
striving  saint.  It  gives  no  sanction  to  dreaminess,  luke- 
warmness,  or  inaction.  One  reason  why  it  has  failed  of 
appreciation  with  some  people  is  that  they  were  too  much 
at  ease  in  Zion.  Its  message  is  to  the  struggling  and  aspir- 
ing soul.  To  the  Christian  warrior  it  gives  the  stimulus  of 
hope  and  the  assurance  of  present  divine  aid  and  future 
eternal  victory. 

The  church  has  passed  through  periods  of  great  persecu- 
tion, when  under  the  stress  of  its  fiery  trial  all  hope 
would  have  died,  if  it  had  not  been  for  this  book.  Martyrs 
could  go  to  the  stake  with  the  book  of  Revelation  in  their 
hands.  Despair  was  impossible  with  the  promises  of  the 
Apocalypse.  Dr.  Chambers  has  said,  "The  scope  of  this 
mysterious  book  is  not  to  convince  unbelievers,  nor  to  illus- 
trate   the    divine    prescience,    nor    to    minister    to    men's 


"8  Les  Mis6rables,  p.  37. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  309 

prurient  desire  to  peer  into  the  future,  but  to  edify  the 
disciples  of  Christ  in  every  age  by  unfolding  the  nature 
and  character  of  earth's  conflicts,  by  preparing  them  for 
trial  as  not  a  strange  thing,  by  consoling  them  with  the 
prospect  of  victory,  by  assuring  them  of  God's  sovereign 
control  over  all  persons  and  things,  and  by  pointing  them 
to  the  ultimate  issue  when  they  shall  pass  through  the  gates 
of  pearl  never  more  to  go  out."^^'' 

Benjamin  M.  Adams  was  one  of  the  saints  of  the  last 
generation.  We  are  told  that  when  he  had  to  preach  on 
Sunday  morning  he  usually  spent  two  hours  in  prayer  and 
in  reading  the  book  of  Revelation  through  from  beginning 
to  end,  and  in  that  way  he  read  the  book  through  nearly 
twelve  hundred  times  in  the  course  of  his  ministry.  He 
said  he  wanted  to  see  how  the  fight  was  coming  out,  how 
the  conflict  was  to  end,  before  he  went  into  the  pulpit.  He 
said  the  city  of  the  rainbows  and  the  hallelujahs  inspired 
him  for  his  pulpit  work.  The  Apocalypse  of  John  is  full 
of  inspiration  for  such  spirits  as  his.  Our  greatest  need  is 
the  need  of  spiritual  help.  The  whole  Bible  was  intended 
to  furnish  that.  No  book  in  the  Bible  is  richer  in  its  supply 
of  spiritual  inspiration  and  aid  than  is  this  last  book  in  the 
list.  The  Bible  is  a  revelation  of  God.  No  book  in  the 
Bible  gives  a  clearer  revelation  of  the  God  of  eternity  who 
fights  for  and  with  his  people  through  time  and  dwells  with 
them  in  heaven. 

We  ought  not  to  abuse  this  book  by  forcing  its  immensi- 
ties into  our  finite  measures.  Its  events  are  not  to  be 
calendared  by  years  and  months  and  days;  its  imagery  is 
not  to  be  reduced  by  mathematical  calculation  to  any  simple 
sum  of  aeons,  periods,  centuries.  John  was  in  the  Spirit 
when  these  revelations  were  made  to  him.  We  must  be  in 
the  Spirit  before  the  revelation  can  come  to  us.  It  is  a 
revelation  to  spiritual  need.     It  is  a  book  for  devotional 


^ 


"»  Schaff ,  Apostolic  Christianity,  p.  831. 


3IO  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

use.  As  Herder  says,  it  has  "manna  for  all  hearts  and 
all  ages."  It  is  "a  book  of  instruction  and  comfort  for  all 
churches  in  which  Christ  walks."  Bengel  said  we  ought 
to  read  it  "as  candidates  for  eternity." 

We  ought  not  to  neglect  it,  as  too  many  Christians  in 
these  days  do.  We  always  will  find  perplexities  in  it. 
There  are  some  passages  which  will  be  made  plain  only 
when  we  get  to  heaven.  Yet  we  ought  to  read  it  for  present 
spiritual  admonition  and  inspiration ;  and  we  will  find  it  an 
inexhaustible  source  of  spiritual  blessing.  We  might  put 
that  motto  on  the  front  flyleaf  of  our  Bibles,  as  applicable 
to  the  whole  book,  "Blessed  is  he  that  readeth,  and  they 
that  hear  the  words  of  the  prophecy,  and  keep  the  things 
that  are  written  therein" ;  but  let  us  remember  that  what 
is  true  of  the  whole  book  is  said  explicitly  and  directly  to 
be  true  of  this  last  book  of  the  Bible.  Let  us  believe  it 
true  of  this  revelation;  let  us  read  and  remember,  let  us 
hear  and  keep  the  words  of  this  prophecy,  and  we  will  find 
them  words  of  spiritual  life. 

XVII.    A  Fitting  End  of  the  Bible 

Let  us  notice  in  closing  that  this  book  forms  a  fitting 
end  of  the  Bible.  It  was  not  the  last  book  written,  but  it 
was  one  of  the  last  books  to  be  admitted  to  our  New  Testa- 
ment list  and  it  stands  last  in  our  English  canon ;  and  we 
are  glad  to  acknowledge  that  it  is  most  suitable  that  a  book 
with  these  characteristics  should  occupy  this  place.  We 
suggest  three  reasons  why  the  Apocalypse  fitly  stands  in 
this  position  in  our  Bible  and  in  our  New  Testament. 

I.  We  already  have  seen  that  the  warp  and  woof  of  the 
material  form  and  substance  of  the  Apocalypse  is  furnished 
by  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures.  Its  images  and  allusions, 
its  framework  and  phrases  are  to  be  traced  to  the  visions 
and  prophecies,  the  histories  and  hymns  of  the  Hebrew 
Holy  Book.    This  fact  is  so  evident  that  this  book  has  been 


THE  APOCALYPSE  311 

called  "a  rhetorical  resume  of  previous  Scripture."  It  is 
a  prophetic  summary  of  all  which  has  been  said  by  holy 
men  of  old  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  "While 
the  eagle  mind  of  John  soars  with  apparent  license,  his 
track  through  the  azure  is  found  to  be  as  carefully  selected 
as  that  of  the  ox  lining  the  furrow.  The  sacred  poet  is 
also  the  plodding  student,  picking  his  way  through  pre- 
scribed data.  The  rein  of  restraint  and  guidance  is  always 
tight  upon  the  neck  of  his  Pegasus.  He  seems  at  every 
moment  conscious  that  he  is  making  what  mankind  will 
come  to  use  as  the  closing  book  of  the  Sacred  Canon — a 
volume  that  must  fit,  in  order  to  finish,  the  whole  scheme 
of  revealed  truth.  So  he  gathers  up  the  threads  of  proph- 
ecy, spun  through  various  ages,  and  from  varying  minds, 
and  combines  them  all  into  one  glowing  node. 

"What  impressiveness  does  this  fact  give  to  all  the  words, 
the  warnings,  the  appeals,  the  promises,  in  this  closing 
book!  John  does  not  speak  from  himself  alone,  from  his 
own  heart,  swelling  with  solicitude  and  love  for  his  fellow 
men,  from  his  own  heaven-filled  spirit ;  but  his  human  voice 
commingles  with  the  voices  of  holy  men  of  all  ages.  When 
he  warns,  it  is  with  the  alarum  which  has  shaken  men  with 
fear  in  all  generations.  When  he  pleads,  it  is  with  the  love 
of  all  the  grand  hearts  that  have  ever  loved  their  kind  and 
given  their  lives  for  love's  sake.  When  he  promises,  he 
brings  together — as  it  were,  melts  together — the  many  seals 
of  certainty  which  God  has  set. to  his  truth  in  the  conscious- 
ness of  his  prophets  from  the  beginning  of  the  world."^^^ 

The  book  of  Revelation  represents  the  last  residuum  of 
the  inspiration  and  revelation  of  the  whole  Bible.  It  is  the 
Elisha  upon  whom  the  mantle  of  previous  prophecy  has 
fallen;  a  double  portion  of  the  Spirit  of  prophecy  which 
is  the  testimony  of  Jesus  is  in  it.  It  fitly  crowns  the  revela- 
tion of  the  entire  Scripture ;  and  from  the  topmost  pinnacle 


^^  James  M.  Ludlow,  Homiletic  Review,  vol.  ix,  p.  214. 


312  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

of  outlook  found  in  the  book  it  unfurls  its  banner  with  the 
last  inscription,  the  final  prayer  and  praise  of  the  strug- 
gling, suffering,  believing,  and  triumphant  church,  "Even 
so,  come,  Lord  Jesus."  The  whole  continuity  of  Scripture 
in  this  final  revelation  finds  its  summarization,  its  magnifi- 
cent and  appropriate  close. 

2.  The  book  of  Revelation  is  not  only  a  Ruth  gleaning 
through  all  the  fields  of  gold  belonging  to  the  family  in- 
heritance in  the  past.  It  is  also  a  Ruth  who  goes  on  from 
the  heat  and  burden  and  privation  of  the  former  days  to 
the  marriage  supper  and  the  rejoicing  in  the  full  possession 
of  the  inheritance  in  the  harvest  home.  It  is  a  fitting  close 
to  the  Bible  because  here,  as  Donald  Eraser  has  said,  "At 
last  the  patience  of  patriarchs  and  saints  is  rewarded;  the 
longings  of  Israel  and  the  church  are  fulfilled ;  and  the 
glory  of  God  shines  unhindered  on  a  scene  of  righteousness 
and  peace." 

Canon  Bernard,  in  his  Bampton  Lectures,  has  suggested : 
"Take  from  the  Bible  the  final  vision  of  the  heavenly  Jeru- 
salem, and  what  will  have  been  lost?  Not  merely  a  single 
passage,  a  sublime  description,  an  important  revelation,  but 
a  conclusion  by  which  all  that  went  before  is  interpreted 
and  justified.  We  should  have  an  unfinished  plan,  in  which 
human  capacities  have  not  found  their  full  realization,  or 
divine  preparations  their  adequate  result.  .  .  .  Revelation 
decrees  not  only  the  individual  happiness,  but  the  corporate 
perfection  of  man,  and  closes  the  book  of  its  prophecy  by 
assuring  the  children  of  the  living  God  that  he  hath  pre- 
pared for  them  a  city."^*^ 

This  last  book  of  prophecy  in  the  Bible  justifies  and  ex- 
plains some  of  the  unfulfilled  prophecies  of  the  older  books. 
These  prophecies  are  not  null  and  void.  They  but  wait 
for  the  fullness  of  time.  The  first  three  chapters  of  Genesis 
demand  the  last  three  chapters  of  Revelation.     They  are 


"^  The  Progress  of  Doctrine,  pp.  219,  220. 


THE  APOCALYPSE  313 

complementary  to  each  other.  The  one  is  needed  for  the 
justification  and  explanation  of  the  other.  In  Genesis  we 
read  of  the  creation  of  the  heaven  and  the  earth,  and  then 
of  the  marriage  of  Adam  and  Eve,  and  then  of  the  serpent 
and  the  temptation  and  the  fall.  In  the  closing  chapters  of 
Revelation  we  come  upon  the  complementary  events,  fol- 
lowing each  other  in  the  reverse  order.  First,  the  old 
serpent  is  fitly  punished,  for  he  is  chained  and  cast  into  the 
bottomless  pit.  He  is  rendered  harmless  forever;  for  he 
never  can  get  loose  from  his  chains  and  he  never  will  reach 
the  bottom  of  the  pit.  Then  we  read  of  the  marriage  of 
the  Lamb  and  the  Bride,  the  second  Adam  and  the  church 
redeemed  by  his  blood.  Then  there  is  that  most  sublime 
vision  of  the  new  heaven  and  the  new  earth,  in  which  God 
dwells  with  the  saints  and  the  saints  dwell  in  eternal  life 
and  light  and  love.  If  we  had  only  the  revelation  of  the 
first  three  chapters  of  Genesis,  we  might  well  despair.  But 
with  the  revelation  of  the  last  three  chapters  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse we  live  in  hope.  The  Divine  Book  finds  here  its  fitting 
close;  for  now  the  divine  plan  is  manifest  in  its  concluded 
symmetry. 

3.  We  notice  last  how  this  book  terminates.  In  the  last 
chapter  and  the  last  verse,  we  read,  "The  grace  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  be  with  the  saints,  Amen."^^^  j^  [^  ^^g  fitting  bene- 
diction, not  for  this  book  only  but  for  the  whole  Word  of 
God.  The  last  word  in  the  Old  Testament  canon  was  that 
word  "curse" ;  "lest  I  come  and  smite  the  earth  with  a 
curse."^*^  The  New  Testament  closes  with  a  sweeter 
word,  the  word  "grace."  As  the  book  forms  a  fitting  close 
to  the  canon  of  the  Covenants,  Old  and  New,  so  this  sen- 
tence forms  a  fitting  close  to  this  book  and  all  the  books. 


i^Rev.  22.  21. 
i«  Mai.  3.  6. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

We  give  an  alphabetical  list  of  a  few  good  books  on  each  of  these 
subjects,  and  we  star  some  of  the  best  of  these. 

I.  On  the  Johannine  Literature 
Abbott,  E.  A.    Johannine  Vocabulary;  Johannine  Grammar. 
Baldensperger,  W.    Der  Prolog  des  vierten  Evangeliums. 
Frommann,  K.    Der  Johanneische  Lehrbegriff. 
*Gloag,  P.  J.    Introduction  to  the  Johannine  Writings. 
Hilgenfeld,  Adolf.     Das  Evangelium  und  die  Briefe  Johannis  nach 

ihrem  Lehrbegriflf. 
Jones,  Maurice.    The  New  Testament  in  the  Twentieth  Century. 
Karl,  W.  A.    Johanneische  Studien. 
Koestlin,  K.  R.     Der  Lehrbegriff  des  Evangeliums  und  der  Briefe 

Johannis. 
Schmiedel,  P.  W.    The  Johannine  Writings. 
Stevens,  G.  B.    The  Johannine  Theology. 
Weiss,  Bemhard.     Der  Johanneische  Lehrbegriff  in  seinen  Grundzu- 

gen  imtersucht. 

II.  On  Johannine  Authorship 
Abbot,  Ezra;  Peabody,  A.  P.,  and  Lightfoot,  J.   B.     The  Fourth 

Gospel. 
Bretschneider,  K.  G.    Probabilia  de  evangelii  et  epistolarum  Joannis 

Apostoli. 
Burkitt,  F.  C.    The  Gospel  History  and  its  Transmission. 
Delff,  Hugo.     Das  vierte  Evangelium  wiederhergestellt ;    Neue   Bei- 

trage  zur  Kritik  und  Erklarung  des  vierten  Evangeliums. 
Drummond,  James.    An  Inquiry  into  the  Character  and  Authorship 

of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
Ebrard,  J.  H.  A.    Das  Evangelium  Johannis  und  die  neueste  Hypo- 

these  uber  seine  Entstehung. 
Evans,  H.  H.    St.  John  the  Author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
Evanson,  Edward.    The  Dissonance  of  the  Four  Generally  Received 

Evangelists. 
Ewald,  Paul.    Das  Hauptproblem  der  Evangelienfrage  und  der  Weg 

zu  seiner  Losung. 
GriU,   Julius.      Untersuchungen   uber   die   Entstehung   des   vierten 

Evangeliums. 
Holtzmann,  Otto.    Das  Johannesevangelium. 

Jackson,  H.  L.    The  Fourth  Gospel  and  Some  Recent  German  Criti- 
cism. 

A^5 


3i6  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Leathes,  Stanley.    The  Witness  of^St.  John  to  Christ. 

Lepin.     L'origine  du  quatrieme  Evangile;  La  Valeur  Historique  du 

Evangile. 
Lightfoot,  J.  B.    Biblical  Essays;  Essays  on  the  Work  entitled  "Super- 
natural Religion." 
Loisy,  Alfred.    Le  Quatrieme  Evangile. 
Luthardt,  C.  E.    St.  John  the  Author  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
Martineau,  James.    The  Seat  of  Authority  in  Religion. 
McDonald,  J.  M.    Life  and  Writings  of  St.  John. 
Norton,  Andrews.    The  Evidences  of  the  Genuineness  of  the  Gospels. 
Orr,  James.     The  Authenticity  of  St.  John's  Gospel  Deduced  from 

Internal  Evidence. 
Robinson,  Armitage.    The  Historical  Character  of  St.  John's  Gospel; 

The  Study  of  the  Gospels. 
*Sanday,  William.     The  Criticism  of  the  Fourth  Gospel;  Authorship 

and  Historical  Character  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
Scott-Moncrief,  C.  E.    St.  John,  Apostle,  Evangelist,  and  Prophet. 
Stanton,  V.  H.    The  Gospels  as  Historical  Documents. 
Tayler,  J.  J.    An  Attempt  to  Ascertain  the  Character  of  the  Fourth 

Gospel. 
Thoma,  Albrecht.    Die  Genesis  des  Johannes  Evangeliums. 
*Watkins,  W.  H.    Modem  Criticism  Considered  in  its  Relation  to  the 

Fourth  Gospel. 
Wendt,  H.  H.    The  Gospel  According  to  St.  John. 
Westcott,  B.  F.    Introduction  to  the  Four  Gospels. 
Wrede,  W.    Charakter  und  Tendenz  des  Johannesevangeliums. 

III.  On  the  Fourth  Gospel 

Askwith,  E.  H.  The  Historical  Value  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 
Bacon,  B.  W.  The  Fourth  Gospel  in  Research  and  Debate. 
Bengel,  J.  A.    Gnomon  of  the  New  Testament. 

Brooke,  A.  E.    "The  Historical  Value  of  the  Fourth  Gospel,"  in  Cam- 
bridge Biblical  Essays. 
Brown,  David.    Commentary  on  St.  John. 

Calvin,  John.    Commentarius  in  Evangelium  secundem  loannem. 
Chrysostom,  John.    HomiHes  on  the  Gospel  of  St.  John. 
Dods,  Marcus.    Expositor's  Greek  Testament. 
Gardner,  Percy.    The  Ephesian  Gospel. 
*Godet,  Frederic.    Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  St.  John. 
Green,  A.  V.    The  Ephesian  Canonical  Writings. 
Heitmuller,  Wilhelm.    Die  Schriften  des  Neuen  Testaments. 
Hengstenberg,  E.  W.    Commentar  zum  Evangelium  Johannes. 
Holtzmann,  H.  J.    Hand-Commentar. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY  317 

Johnston,  J.  S.    The  Philosophy  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 

Kreyenbuhl.    Das  Evangelium  der  Wahrheit. 

Lucke,  G.  C.  F.    Commentar  iiber  die  Schriften  Johannis. 

Luthardt,  C.  E.    St.  John's  Gospel. 

Maurice,  F.  D.    The  Gospel  of  St.  John. 

McClymont,  J.  A.    The  New  Century  Bible. 
*Moulton,  W.  F.,  and  Milligan,  William.    Schaflf's  Popular  Commentary. 

Origen.    Commentarii  in  Evangelium  Joannis. 

Plummer,  A.    Cambridge  Greek  Testament. 

Reville,  Jean.    Le  quatrieme  evangile. 
*Reynolds,  H.  R.    The  Pulpit  Commentary. 

Scott,  E.  F.    The  Fourth  Gospel,  its  Purpose  and  Theology. 

Spitta,  Friedrich.    Das  Johannes-Evangelium  als  Quelle  der  Geschichte 
Jesu. 

Tholuck,  A.    The  Gospel  of  John. 

Warschauer,  J.    The  Problem  of  the  Fourth  Gospel. 

Weiss,  Bernhard.    Meyer's  Commentary. 

Wellhausen,  J.     Erweiterungen  und  Anderungen  im  vierten  Evan- 
gelium; Das  Evangelium  Johannis. 
*Westcott,  B.  F.    The  Speaker's  Commentary. 

Zahn,  Theodor.    Das  Evangelium  Johannis. 

IV.  On  the  Johannine  Epistles 

Alexander,  William.     The  Speaker's  Commentary;  The  Expositor's 
Bible. 

Barrett,  G.  S.    The  Devotional  Commentary. 

Baumgarten,  Otto.    Die  Schriften  des  Neuen  Testaments. 

Brooke,  A.  E.    International  Critical  Commentary. 

Cox,  Samuel.    Private  Letters  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  John. 
*Findlay,  G.  G.    Fellowship  in  the  Life  Eternal. 

Haupt,  Erich.    The  First  Epistle  of  St.  John. 

Holtzmann,  H.  J.,  in  Hand-Commentar. 
*Law,  Robert.    The  Tests  of  Life 

Plummer,  Alfred,  in  Cambridge  Greek  Testament. 

Rothe,  R.    Exposition  of  the  First  Epistle  of  John. 

Watson,  Charles.    The  First  Epistle  of  St.  John. 

Weiss,  Bernhard,  in  Meyer's  Commentary. 
*Westcott,  B.  F.    The  Epistles  of  St.  John. 

V.  On  the  Johannine  Apocalypse 

Benson,  E.  W.    The  Apocalypse. 

Berg,  H.    The  Drama  of  the  Apocalypse. 


3i8  JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 

Bleek,  Friedrich.    Vorlesungen  uber  die  Apocalypse. 

Bousset,  Wilhelm,  in  Meyer's  Commentary. 

Brown,  Charles.    Heavenly  Visions. 

Charles,  R.  H.    Studies  in  the  Apocalypse. 

Davidson,  S.    Outlines  of  a  Commentary  on  Revelation. 

Dean,  J.  T.    Visions  and  Revelations. 

Elliott,  E.  B.    Horae  Apocalypticae. 

Forbes,  H.  P.,  in  International  Handbooks  to  the  New  Testament. 

Gebhardt,  Hermann.    The  Doctrine  of  the  Apocalypse. 

Gibson,  E.  C.  S.    The  Revelation  of  St.  John  the  Divine. 

Gunkel,  H.    Schopfung  und  Chaos. 

Holtzmann,  H.  J.,  in  Hand-Commentar. 

Hort,  F.  J.  A.    The  Apocalypse  of  St.  John,  Chapters  1-3. 

Jowett,  G.  T.    The  Apocalypse  of  St.  John. 

Laughlin,  T.  C.    The  Solecisms  of  the  Apocalypse. 

Lucke,  G.  C.  F.    Versuch  einer  vollstandigen  Einleitung  in  die  Offen- 

barung  Johannis. 
*Milligan,   William.     The  Revelation  of  St.  John;  Lectures  on  the 

Apocalypse;  Discussions  on  the  Apocalypse;  Commentary  in  The 

Expositor's  Bible. 
*Moffatt,  James,  in  The  Expositor's  Greek  Testament. 
Palmer,  F.    The  Drama  of  the  Apocalypse. 
Porter,  F.  C,  in  Messages  of  the  Bible. 
Ramsay,  A.,  in  Westminster  New  Testament. 
Ramsay,  W.  M.    The  Letters  to  the  Seven  Churches. 
Scott,  C.  A.,  in  The  New  Century  Bible. 
Scott,  J.  J.    The  Apocalypse. 

Selwyn,  E.  C.    The  Christian  Prophets  and  the  Prophetic  Apocalypse. 
Simcox,  W.  H.,  in  Cambridge  Greek  Testament. 
Smith,  H.  A.    The  Divine  Parable  of  History. 
Spitta,  Friedrich.    Die  Offenbarung  des  Johannes. 
Strange,  Cresswell.     Instructions  on  the  Revelation  of  St.  John  the 

Divine. 
Stuart,  Moses.    A  Commentary  on  the  Apocalypse. 
*Swete,  H.  B.    The  Apocalypse  of  St.  John. 
Terry,  M.  S.    Biblical  Apocalyptics. 

Trench,  R.  C.    Commentary  on  the  Epistles  to  the  Seven  Churches. 
Vischer,  Everhard.    Die  Offenbarung  Johannis. 
Volter,  Daniel.     Die  Entstehung  der  Apocalypse;  Das  Problem  der 

Apocalypse;  Die  Offenbarung  Johannis. 
Weiss,  Bemhard,  in  Das  Neue  Testament. 
Weiss,  Johannes.    Die  Offenbarung  Johannis. 
Wellhausen,  J.    Analyse  der  Offenbarung  Johannis. 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


Abraham,  117 

Abruptness  in  style,  52,  160 

Aim  of  Fourth  Gospel,  113,  114 

Alogi,  240,  241 

Andrew,  23,  24,  26,  107,  no,  112 

Anger,  righteous,  55-58 

Anointing,  Christian,  181,  182 

Anonymity  in  Apocalypses,  225 

Antichrist  in  First  John,  184 

Antinomianism     combated,     174, 

175 

Apocalypses,  pseudonymous,  248- 

250 
Apostolic   Comment,    Gospel   of, 

97-99 
Aristion,  138,  139 
Artistic  form  of  Gospel,  94 
Assumption  of  Moses,  254,  255 
Atonement  in  First  John,  186-188 
Authenticity   of  the  Apocalypse, 

240,  244 
Authenticity  of  Gospel  defended, 

153-155 

Barnabas,  Epistle  of,  272 
Baruch,  Apocalypse  of,  255,  256 
Bethsaida,  26 
Bible  revelation,  260,  261 
Boanerges  spirit  in  John,  44-58, 

160,  167,  168,  190,  235-237,  305, 

306 
Brevity  of  Gospel,  81 

Central  Thought,  of  Gospel,  114 
Cerinthus,  174,  175,  240 
Church  calendars,  135 
Clementine  Homilies,  128 
Concentration  of  action,  in  Gos- 
pel, 94,  95 
Confessions   of  faith,   in   Gospel, 

107,  108 
Contrasts,  in  John,  93, 95,  165,  166 
Convictions  and  compromise,  51 
Curiosities  of  exegesis,  263,  270- 
275 

Daniel  and  the  Apocalypse,  285, 
286,  287 


Dependence  of  Apocalypse  on  Old 
Testament,  285-288 

Diatessaron  of  Tatian,  127,  128 

Didactic  purpose,  in  John,  in, 
112 

Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  223-231, 
241 

Diotrephes,  215,  216 

Distinctive  doctrines  of  Apoca- 
lypses, 251 

Docetism  combated,  174,  175 

Early  Christian  literature,  trust- 
worthy, 142,  143 
Enoch,  Book  of,  252-254,  258,  292 
Ephesus,  36,  72 

Eschatology  of  Apocalypses,  251 
Esdras,  Fourth  Book  of,  256 
Estimates  of  Gospel,  77-80,  92,  93 
External  evidence  for  John,  141- 

149 
Ezekiel  and  the  Apocalypse,  285, 
286,  287 

Faces  of  flint,  47 

Fellowship,  conditions  of,  190,  191 
Form  of  Apocalypses,  250 
Fourth  Gospel,  no  romance,  10,  11 
Futurist  school,  278 

Georgius  Hamartolus,  131-134 
Greek  of  the  Apocalypse,  230-234, 
247 

Heaven,  in  Apocalypse,  303,  304, 

■306,  307 
Hebraisms  in  John,  108-110 
Historical  school,  278 
Historicity  of  Gospel,  100-102 
Holy  Spirit,  90,  91 

Incarnation  real,   173,    174,    184- 

186 
Internal  evidence  for  John,  149- 

Irenaeus-tradition,  143-145 
James,  brother  of  Jesus,  26 
James,  brother  of  John,  22,  23,  27, 
44,  45,  49 


319 


320 


JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 


John,  a  Boanerges,  44,  55 
a  seer,  66-68 
and  Bethsaida,  26,  27 
and  New  Testament  types 

of  literature,  12 
and  Plato,  10,  11 
denouncing  sin,  53 
disliked,  21 

family  not  poor,  27,  28 
in  art,  48,  49 

in  the  Book  of  Acts,  25,  26 
in  the  Fourth  Gospel,  23-25 
in  Galatians,  26 
in  the  synoptic  Gospels,  22, 

23 
meaning  of  name,  27 
rebuked,  22 

the  Eagle-Evangelist,  67,  68 
the  theologian,  68,  69 
John  the  Baptist,  15,  16,  25,  45, 

46,  63,  82,  106,  107 
John  the  Presbyter,  136-142 
Jesus  and  John,  20,  21,  24,  25,  63- 

66 
Joseph,  194,  195 
Judas,  53,  95,  106 
Judas,  not  Iscariot,  24,  90 

Knowledge,  in  First  John,  180-184 

Lamb,  name  for  Jesus,  227,  228 
Lazarus,  90,  95 
Letters,  religious,  217,  218 
Lord's  Prayer  in  John,  90 
Love,  in  First  John,  177-180 
Luther,  on  Apocalypse,  242,  243, 
262 

Malchus,  90,  91 

Manifold  fulfillment,  in  Apoca- 
lypse, 279-283 

Martyrdom  of  John?,  129-136 

Mary  Magdalene,  29,  30 

Mary,  mother  of  James,  30 

Mary,  mother  of  Jesus,  18,  214 

Mary,  wife  of  Clopas,  29 

Material  of  Apocalypses,  250 

Millennium,  300 

Miracles,  in  John,  90,  107 

Modesty  of  John,  17-20,  59-62, 
137,  167,  168 

Muratorian  Fragment,  no,  172, 
205,  207,  239,  244 

Mysterious  revelation,  261 


Nathanael,  23,  90,  95,  107 
New  Jerusalem,  300,  301 
New  material,  in  Gospel,  91 
Nicodemus,  23,  90,  91,  96 
Number  of   the   beast,   271-275, 
282,  283 

Omissions,  of  Gospel,  80-88 
Outline,  of  Gospel,  115 
Outline   by   chapters   and   para- 
graphs, 116-119 

Papias-tradition  ?,  130-135 
Paraclete,  90 
Parallelism,  in  John,  108 
Patmos   scenery,   in   Apocalypse, 

292-294,  302 
Paul  and  Luke,  21 

in  contrast  with  John,  9,  11, 
12,  18,  19,  31,  32,  69-71, 
72,  73. 
Persons  peculiar  to  John,  90 
Peter  and  Jesus,  65 

and  John,  22,  23,  25,  26,  63, 

65,  66,  69-71,  72,  73 
and  Judas,  95 
and  Mark,  20 
beloved,  20,  21 
garrulous,  16,  17 
Philip,  25,  90 
Philip  Sidetes,  134 
Philosophumena    of    Hippoljrtus, 

128 
Phrases    characteristic    of    John, 

229,  230 
Phrases  peculiar  to  John,  228,  229 
Pilate,  91 

Polemic  purpose,  in  John,  in 
Preterist  school,  278 
Principles  of  interpretation,  284, 

285 
Purpose  of  Apocalypses,  250 

Refrains,  in  John,  105,  106 
Repetition,  in  John,  164,  165 
Reticence  of  John,  17-20 
Ritual  ignored  in  John,  83,  86,  99, 


Saintliness  of  John,  58,  59 
Salome,  her  character,  31 

her  work,  17,  18,  28-30, 
214 

related  to  Mary,  28-30 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


321 


Salvation  from  sin,  192-196 
Sea,  in  Apocalypse,  301,  302 
Secrets  of  Enoch,  Book  of,  257- 

259 
Sevens,  in  John,  107,  108,  297,  298 
Sources  of  visions  in  Apocalypse, 

291-295 
Spirituality  of  Gospel,  99-102 
Style   of   John,   92-97,    102- no, 

163-166 
Supplementary  purpose,  in  John, 

112,  113 
Symbolism,  in  Apocalypse,   296- 

303 

Symmetry,  of  Gospel,  95 

Theology,  Johannine,  9 


Thomas,  90,  131 
Three  Factors  of  Gospel,  114 
Threes,  in  John,  106,  163,  299 
Titles  peculiar  to  John,  90,  227, 

228 
Tracts  for  Bad  Times,  248 
Traditions  concerning  John,  34-44 
Tubingen  or  Tendency  school,  125, 

126,  240 

Unity  of  Apocalypse,  288-291 

Variety  in  Gospel,  95,  96 
Victory,  in  First  John,  196-202 
Vocabulary  of  John,  104,  105,  165 

Witnesses,  in  John,  107 


INDEX  OF  TEXTS 


Genesis 

4.  15,  296;  39.  9,  194;  41-  53,  54, 

296 
Exodus 

7.  25,  296 
Leviticus 

4.  6,  17,  296;  8.  33,  296;  26.  21, 
24,  28,  296 

Numbers 

19.  12,  296 
Deuteronomy 

28.  7,  296 
Joshua 

6.  3,  4,  297 

1  Samuel 
2.  5,  296 

2  Kings 

5.  10,  297;  6.  16,  304 
Psalms 

139.  8-10,  200 
Isaiah 

5.  292;  50.  7,  47 
Daniel 

12.  2,  167 
Malachi 

3-  6,  311 
Enoch 

I.  3,  292 
Matthew 

4.  21,  22,  23;  9.  30,  56;  10.  2-4, 
23;  II.  25,  26,  260;  II.  28,  260; 

13,  297;  13-  12,  29;  13.  39,  292; 
17.  21,  219;  17.  24,  25,  65;  20. 
20-24,  22,  28,  35,  50,  130;  23. 
13-33,  56;  26,  64,  291 

Mark 

I.  19,  20,  23;  I.  20,  27;  I.  43,  56; 
3-  5.  56;  3-  16-19,  23;  5-  37.  22; 

9.  2,  22;  9.  38.  22;  ID.  35-41,  22; 

10.  39,  129,  130;  13.  3-5,  23; 
13.  32,  269,  291;  14.  33,  22; 
15.  40,  29;  15.  41,  27 

Luke 

5.  8-11,  23;  5.  ID,  26;  5.  32,  87; 

6.  14-16,  23;  8.  3,  27;  9.  49,  22, 
54;  9.  52-55,  22,  54;  22.  18,  22 

John 

J.  I,  227;  I.  1-4,  169;  I.  1-3, 


108;  I.  5,  108,  109;  I.  7,  107; 
I.  10,  108,  109;  I.  14,  114,  227; 
I.  17,  loi;  I.  18,  166,  169;  I.  20, 
108;  I.  29,  107,  227;  I.  38,  24; 

1.  41,  107;  I.  44,  26;  I.  49,  108; 

2.  13-22,  56;  2.  19,  90;  3.  3,  90; 

3.  7,  260;  3.  II,  109;  3.  16,  98, 
166;  3.  18,  166;  3.  36,  166,  169; 

4.  10,  90;  4.  32,  90;  5.  31-39, 
164:5.33,  107:5.34,  107:5.36, 
107;  5-  37,  107:  5.  39-46,  107; 

6.  34,  90:  6.  48,  107;  6.  70,  53; 

7.  20,  85:  7.  37,  229:  7.  46,  107; 

8.  12,  107:  8.  14,  107:  8.  20,  109; 
8.  44,  53:  8.  48,  85;  8.  51,  52, 
55,  229:  8.  52,  85:  9.  38,   108; 

10.  7,  107:  10.  II,  107:  10.  20, 
85;    10.   25,    107:    10.    28,    108; 

11.  25,  107;  II.  27,  108:  13.  16, 
108;  13.  25,24;  13.  36,90;  14.  5, 
90;  14.  6,  loi,  107;  14.  16,  166; 

14.  23,   24,   229;    14.   27,    108; 

15,  292:  15.  I,  107:  15.  20,  229; 

15.  26,  107;  15.  27,  107:  16.  13, 
loi;  16.  14,  107;  17.  6,  229; 
17.  12,  53;  17.  17,  loi;  18.  15, 

16,  27;  18.  37,  loi,  107;  19.  25, 
29;  19.  27,  28:  19.  34,  228;  19. 
35,  66,  107;  20.  2,  63;  20.  4-6, 
66;    20.    17,    83:    20.    28,    108; 

20.  30,  31,  113,  169:  20.  31,  88; 

21.  2,  23;  21.  20,  63;  21.  23,  43; 
21.  24,  102,  150,  151 

Acts 

1.7,270;  I.  13,23:3.  I  to  4.  22, 

25;  8.  14-25,  25:  12.  2,  49;  20. 

28,  187 
Romans 

3.  4,  306;  3.  25,  187;  5.  9,  187; 

12.  6-8,  297;  12.  21,  306;  16.  13, 
209 

2  Corinthians 

II.  22-31,  19 
Galatians 

2.  9,  26;  6.  10,  39 
Ephesians  J 

I.  7,  187;  2.  13,  187;  4.  26,  55,       ^ 

57;  6.  19,  264 


322 


INDEX  OF  TEXTS 


323 


Philippians 

2.  5,.  57 
Colossians 

I.  20,  187 
James 

3.  17,  297;  4.  2,  306 
I  Peter 

I.  2,  187;  I.  18,  19,  187;  5.  I, 
137.  208;  5.  13,  210 

1  John 

1.  I,  224,  227;  I.  1-4,  169;  I.  3, 
189;  I.  5,  163,  166;  I.  6,  10,  53, 
166;  I.  7,  188;  I.  7  to  2.  I,  193, 
194;  I.  10,  166;  2.  I,  166,  192; 

2.  1-3,  163;  2.  2,  188;  2.  4,  166; 
2.  5,  194,  229;  2.  6,  184;  2.  II, 
164;  2.  12-14,  161;  2.  13,  199, 
229;  2.  14,  200;  2.  15,  164;  2.  19, 
161;  2.  20,  180;  2.  21,  22,  19; 

2.  22,  53,  184;  2.  26,  161;  2.  27, 
166;  3.  2,  183;  3.  3,  194;  3.  5, 
182;   3.    6,    194;   3.    7-10,    190; 

3.  8,  ID,  53,  192,  196;  3.  9,  194; 

3.  ID,    19;  3.    14,   182;  3.    15,   53; 

3. 19, 182:3.23, 163:3. 24, 182; 

4.  2,  186:  4.  3,  184,  186;  4.  4, 
196,  200,  229:  4.  7-12,  164:  4.  9, 
166:  4.  12,  169:  4.  16,  260:  5.  4, 
200,  229:  5.  7-II,  165:  5.  II, 
163;  5.   12,   166,   169:  5.   13,   169; 

5.  18-20,  183,  201,  202;  5.  20, 
189:  5.  21,  202 

2  John 

I,  137,  208:  10,  II,  53,  212-214 

3  John 

I,  137,  208 

Jude 
9,  254 

Revelation 

I.  I,  225,  266,  285;  I.  I,  2,  223; 
I.  3,  225,  297,  307:  I.  I,  3,  260, 
266;  I.  4,  223,  299:  I.  4-6,  232; 
I.  5,  187:  I.  7,  228:  I.  9,  224, 
266;  I.  13,  285;  I.  15,  302:  2.  7, 
306;  2.  7,  II,  229;  2.  7,  II,  17, 


29,   266;   2.   9,    235;   2.    ID,   299 

2.  II,  306;  2.  17,  306:  2.  26,  306 

3.  3,    269:    3.    5,    229,    306:    3.    6: 

13,  22,  266;  3.  8,  10,  229;  3.  9i 
235;  3-  12,  306;  3.  21,  306:  4.  3 
293;  4-  4.  299:  4.  6,  299,  302 

5.  9,  188:  5.  12,  228:  5.  13,  293 

6.  12-17,  294:  6.  14,  293:  6.  16 
228:  6.   16,  17,  235:  7.   I,  299 

7.  1-3,  294:  7.  3,  285;  7.  9,  231 
7.  14,  188,  228:  7.  16,  17,  236 
7.  17,  228:  8.  7,  293:  8.  7-11 
236:   8.    7-12,   294:   8.    8,   294 

9.  I,  17,  18,294:9.4,285:9.  15 
299:  9.  16,  301:  10.  2,  5,  8,  294 

10.  6,   285,   293:    10.    II,    225 

11.  I,  285:  II.  14,  299:  II.  19 
293:   12.   I,  299:   12.  3,  9,  293 

12.  7,  285:  12.  II,  188,  229,  306 

13.  I,  286,  299,  302:  13.  1-4 
235:  13.  I,  21,  293:  13.  18,  271 

14.  6,  299:  14.  7,  293:  14.  13 
297:  14.  14,  291,  293:  14.  15 
291:   14.    18,  292:   14.  20,  292 

15.  2,  302:  16.  2-7,  294:  16.  3 
294:   16.    13,   299:   16.   15,   269 

16.  17-21,  294:  16.  19,  299 
16.  20,  293:  16.  21,  293:  17.  3 
293,  299:  17.  5,  235:  17.  14 
228: 18.  12,  13,  295:  18.  21,  294 
19-    7,    230:    19.    9,    228,    297 

19.  13,  227:  19.  15,  235:  19.  20, 
286:  20.  2,  231:  20.  4,  238,  299 

20.  6,  297:  20.  8,  285:  20.  13 
294:  21,  299:  21.  I,  294,  301 
302:  21.  2,  230:  21.  3,  7,  8.  236 

21.  7,  229,  306:  21.  9,  211:  21 
10,  293:  21.  15,  285: 21.  16,  300 

21.  17,  301:  21.  23,  228:  21.  25 
301 ;  22.  I,  285:  22.  2,  299:  22.  3 
228:  22.  7,  225,  297:  22.  7,  8 
224:  22.  7,  9,  229:  22.  9,  225 

22.  10,  225;  22.  II,  313;  22.  14 
297:  22.  17,  230:  22.  18,  225 
266:  22.  19,  225,  266 


INDEX  OF  NAMES 


Abbot,  127,  154.  317 

Abbott,  135,   153.  244,  246,  289, 

317 
Adam  of  Saint  Victor,  67 
Adams,  309 
Adeney,  246 
^schylus,  94 
Alexander,  Bishop,  161,  170,  172, 

209,  319 
Alexander,  Dr.,  307 
Alexander  the  Great,  65 
Alford,  112,  209,  246,  278,  282 
Allen,  81 
Andreas,  242 
Amalrich,  271 
Amphilochius,  242 
Apollinaris,  148,  254 
Apollonius,  35,  238 
Arethas,  242 
Arnold,  246 
Askwith,  loi,  318 
Athanasius,  209 
Auberlen,  275,  278,  282 
Augusti,  171 
Augustine,  34,  43,  52,  67,  93,  134, 

177,  179,  217,  252,  268 
Ayasalouk,  36 

Bacon,    130,    135,    141,    145,    152, 

153,  246,  318 
Baldensperger,  317 
Ballenstedt,  122 
Barnes,  278 
Barrett,  319 
Bartlet,  246 
Basil,  217 
Basilides,  128,  148 
Bauer,  151 
Baumgarten,  319 
Baur,  68,  124,  125,  127,  128,  151, 

152,  170,  171,  173,  210,  246,  273, 

278 
Baxter,  217 
Bellarmin,  271,  282 
Belser,  246 
Benary,  272 
Benedict  IX,  271 
Bengel,  33,  52,  99,  162,  209,  217, 

263,  270,  278,  282,  310,  318 


324 


Bent,  294 

Benson,  233,  262,  278,  319 

Berg,  319 

Bernard,  270,  311 

Bertholdt,  154 

Beyschlag,  81,  113,  154,  246 

Beza,  44,  211,  243,  271 

Bickersteth,  278 

Biedermann,  77 

Birks,  278 

Bleek,  loi,  154,  162,  171,  208,  209, 

246,  278,  282,  320 
Boswell,  81 

Bousset,  129,  246,  278,  289,  320 
Boyd-Carpenter,  278 
Boyle,  103 
Bretschneider,  122,  123,  138,  171, 

317 
Briggs,  289 
Brooke,  loi,  318,  319 
Brooks,  PhilHps,  81 
Brown,  318,  320 
Browning,  236,  284 
Bruce,  253 
Bruckner,  153,  209 
Bugenhagen,  271 
BuUinger,  243,  278 
Burkitt,  130,  134,  317 

Caius,  241 

Caligula,  271,  273 

Calovius,  271 

Calvin,  34,  177,  243,  271,  318 

Candlish,  57 

Carlstadt,  242 

Carpenter,  275 

Cassian,  40 

Cerinthus,  36,  54,  112,  174,  175 

Chambers,  308 

Chapman,  141 

Charles,  254,  257,  320 

Chemnitz,  271 

Chrysostom,  52,  58,  92,  176,  177, 

241,  318 
Clarke,  276 
Claudius,  78 
Clement  of  Alexandria,  35,  37,  99, 

134,  145,  147,  148,  172,  206,  209, 

239,  244,  252 


INDEX  OF  NAMES 


325 


Clericus,  278 

Cludius,  122 

Cone,  153 

Comely,  246 

Cowles,  273,  278 

Cowper,  217 

Cox,  319 

Credner,  138,  175,  208,  209,  246 

Crome,  123 

Culross,  50,  77 

Cyprian,  173,  207 

Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  241 

Dante,  236 

Davidson,  125,  152,  173,  209,  240, 

246,  272,  278,  320 
Davison,  71,  78,  120,  135,  155 
Dawson,  81 
Dean,  320 
De  Burgh,  278 
Dellf,  141,  152,  317 
De  Wette,  112,  124,  154,  162,  171, 

175,  209,  262,  278,  282,  306 
Didymus,  254 
Dionysius  Bar  Salibi,  127 
Dionysius  of  Alexandria,  140,  206, 

223,  224,  225,  226,  227,  229,  230, 

231,  232,  241,  262 
Dobschiitz,  141,  153,  246 
Doddridge,  217 
Dods,  155,  318 
Dollinger,  60 

Domitian,  41,  131,  245,  246 
Drummond,  Henry,  81 
Drummond,    James,    79,    80,    88, 

135,  149,  154.  317 
Duncan,  52 
Dusterdieck,   162,   175,  208,  209, 

246,  278,  282,  287 

Ebrard,  112,  138,  148,  154,   162, 

171,  175,  209,  246,  278,  282,  317 
Eckermann,  122 
Edersheim,  81 
Eichhorn,  171,  243,  246,  262,  278, 

282 
Elliott,  246,  278,  320 
Ephraim  of  Edessa,  127,  207 
Epiphanius,  40,  240 
Erasmus,  112,  138,  243 
Ernesti,  68 
Eusebius,  35,  112,  113,  131,  133, 

134,  138,  140,  148,  207,  224,  241, 

245 


Evans,  154,  3 17 
Evanson,  121,  122,  153,  317 
Ewald,    no,    112,    147,    154,  210, 
246,  256,  278,  317 

Faber,  278 

Farrar,  81,  106,  141,  160,  161,  162, 

211,  246,  272,  278,  294,  306 
Findlay,  319 
Fisher,  154 
Florinus,  144 
Forbes,  246,  320 
Fraser,  99,  168,  217,  288,  312 
Fritzsche,  138,  272 
Frommann,  317 
Fuller,  278 

Gardner,  153,  318 

Garratt,  263 

Gaussen,  278 

Gebhardt,  320 

Geilde,  81 

Georgius    Hamartolus,    131,    132, 

133.  134,  136,  138,  145 
Genseric,  271 
Gibbon,  264 
Gibson,  320 
Gloag,  154,  246,  317 
Godet,  72,  no,  154,  246,  274,  278, 

318 
Green,  246,  318 
Gregory  the  Great,  217 
Gregory  of  Nazianzus,  207,  217, 

241 
Gregory  of  Nyssa,  217 
Grill,  153.  317 

Grotius,  65,  112,  138,  209,  278 
Guericke,  209 
Gunkel,  289,  320 

Hammond,  210,  278 

Harnack,  126,  127,  135,  141,  142, 

153,  216,  230,  246 
Harris,  218 
Hase,  126,  154,  246 
Hauff,  123 
Haupt,   162,   171,   172,   175,   198, 

199,  319 
Hausrath,  171,  175,  256,  272 
Ha  vet,  246 
Heidegger,  160 
HeitmuUer,  318 
Henderson,  246 


326 


JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 


Hengstenberg,  112,  154,  246,  263, 

270,  275,  278,  282,  318 
Heracleon,  148 

Herder,  77,  243,  274,  275,  278,  310 
Heumann,  274 
Hilgenfeld,  125,  126,  128,  152,  171, 

173,  188,  210,  246,  273,  317 
Hippolytus,  128,  239,  241,  244,  282 
Hitzig,  272 

Hofmann,  171,  210,  246,  278 
Holsten,  125 
Holtzmann,  H.,  81,  106,  152,  170, 

171,  175,  205,  210,  278,  289,  318, 

319,  320 
Holtzmann,  O.,  152,  317 
Hopkins,  103 
Hort,  246,  288,  320 
Hug,  112,  171,  246,  278 
Hugo,  307 
Huntingford,  263 
Huther,  141,  162,  171,  175,  210 

Ignatius,  148 

Iliad,  94 

Inge,  loi 

Irenffius,  34,  36,  80,  112,  133,  134, 

139,  143,  144,  145,  146,  147.  148, 
173,  206,  238,  244,  245,  252,  274, 
275,  282,  283 
Iverach,  148 

Jackson,  317 

Jerome,  35,  39,  40,  77,  m,  130, 

134.  138,  140,  173,  205,  207,  210, 

217,  245,  262 
Johnson,  Samuel,  81 
Johnston,  319 
Jones,  317 
Jowett,  320 
Julian,  271 
Jiilicher,  89,  93,  129,  153,  170,  246, 

269,  288,  289,  295 
Justin  Martyr,  127,  128,  148,  237, 

245 

Karl,  317 

Kaufmann,  97 

Keim,  81,  106,  126,  128,  141,  17'; 

Kelly,  278 

Kingsley,  49 

KipHng,  301 

Kliefoth,  278 

Knox,  48 

Kostlin,  125,  151,  317 


Krenkel,  40,  272,  278 
Kreyenbiihl,  153,  246,  319 

Lange,  80,  112,  154,  246 

Lardner,  211 

Laud,  271 

Laughlin,  320 

Law,  169,  170,  171,  319 

Leathes,  154,  318 

Lee,  246,  278,  282 

Leonardo  da  Vinci,  49 

Lepin,  318 

Liddon,  154 

Lightfoot,  126,  135,  141,  154,  171, 

210,  246,  317,  320 
Lincoln,  48 
Lipsius,  175 
Loisy,  129,  153,  318 
Louis  XV,  271 
Lucke,  123,  154,  171,  173,  175,208, 

J209,  246,  278,  319,  320 
Ludlow,  311 
Lunemann,  210 
Luthardt,  no,  114,  149,  154,  162, 

165,  210,  318,  319 
Luther,  34,  48,  ']'],  177,  211,  217, 

242,  243,  262,  271,  276,  282,  304 

Macdonald,  154 

Macknight,  211 

Maitland,  278 

Mangold,  175 

Martineau,  318 

Maurice,  49,  275,  278,  319 

Mayer,  154 

McCheyne,  217 

McClymont,  319 

McDonald,  318 

McDowell,  Bishop,  168 

McGiflFert,  141,  153,  246 

Mede,  278 

Melanchthon,  33,  243 

Melito,  148,  238 

Menzies,  129 

Michaelis,  113,  160,  171,  175,  210 

Middleton,  209 

Mill,  211,  246 

Milligan,  62,  246,  278,  286,  287, 

289,  298,  300,  319,  320 
Milton,  262,  306 
Moffatt,  129,  134,  135,  141,  145, 

153,  257,  258,  289,  295,  296,  320 
Mohammed,  271 
Mommsen,  246 


INDEX  OF  NAMES 


327 


Moody,  263 
Moulton,  319 

Napoleon,  271 
Neander,  124,  154,  175,  209 
Nero,  271,  272 
Nerva,  131 
Neumann,  246 
Newman,  146 
Newton,  217,  261,  278 
Newton,  Benjamin,  278 
Newton,  Bishop,  278 
Nicephorus,  242,  255 
Niebelungenlied,  94 
Norbert,  270 
Norton,  154,  318 

Oecumenius,  210 

Olshausen,  123,  209 

Origen,  33,  35,  77,  100,  130,  131, 

132,  133,  U3,  206,  223,  239,  244, 

252,  254,  319 
Orr,  154,  318 

Palmer,  262,  320 

Pantasnus,  146 

Papias,    130,    131,   132,   133,   135, 

136,  137,  138,  139,  141, 172, 208 
Paul  V,  271 
Paulinus,  262 
Peabody,  317 
Peake,  246 

Pfleiderer,  125,  129,  153,  170,  171 
Philip  Sidetes,  134,  136,  138,  145 
Pierson,  79,  80 
Plato,  ID,  97,  295 
Plummer,  60,  141,  211,  319 
Plutarch,  65 
Polycarp,  36,  133,  139,  143,  144, 

145,  147,  148,  172,  238 
Polycrates,  35,  59 
Porter,  246,  279,  320 
Pothinus,  144,  145 
Pressensd,  154 

Raineri,  270 

Ramsay,  A.,  320 

Ramsay,  W.  M.,  135,  172,  246,  320 

Renan,  35,  no,  125,  126,  128,  272, 

278 
Reuss,  126,  160,  171,  175,  246,  272, 

278 
R^ville,  153,  246,  319 
Reynolds,  319 


Ribera,  278 

Ritschl,  147,  154 

Robinson,  79,  80,  102,  135,  318 

Robertson,  A.  T.,  234 

Robertson,  F.  W.,  217 

Romaine,  217 

Rossetti,  Christina,  284 

Rothe,  319 

Rutherford,  217 

Sabatier,  272,  289 

Salmon,   35,    113,    141,   210,   246, 

268,  271,  273,  274 
Salmond,  162,  175,  206,  207,  211 
Sanday,  141,  150,  155,  3 18 
Saphir,  103 
Schafer,  246 
Schaflf,  68,  80,  103,  108,  no,  270, 

309 
Schenkel,  80,  126,  152,  171 
Scherer,  125,  152 
Schmidt,  81 

Schmiedel,  129,  145,  152,  210,  317 
Scholten,  125,  126,  152 
Schiirer,  141,  256 
Schwartz,  129 
Schwegler,  125,  128,  152 
Schweitzer,  152 
Scott,  C.  A.,  153,  244,  254,  256, 

278,  289,  319,  320 
Scott,  J.  J.,  320 
Scott-Moncrief,  155,  318 
Selwyn,  246,  320 
Shakespeare,  169 
Sheldon,  70 

Simcox,  104,  244,  289,  320 
Smith,  David,  81 
Smith,  G.  A.,  81 
Smith,  H.  A.,  320 
Sophocles,  94 
South,  262 
Spitta,  289,  319,  320 
Stalker,  69,  286 
Stanley,  53,  292,  294 
Stanton,  135,  155,  244,  318 
Steele,  218 
Stevens,  317 
Storr,  171 
Strachan,  155 
Strange,  320 

Strauss,  81,  103,  123,  151 
Strong,  155 

Stuart,  246,  273,  278,  320 
Suidas,  40,  42 


328 


JOHN  AND  HIS  WRITINGS 


Swete,  247,  255,  256,  259,  275,  278, 
320 

Talmage,  276,  277 

Tatian,  127,  148 

Tayler,  152,  318 

Tauler,  180 

Terry,  286,  320 

Tertullian,  35,  134,  146,  147,  148, 

172,  207,  239,  244,  252 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  207,  241 
Theodoret,  207,  241 
Theophilus,  148,  238 
Theophylact,  210 
Thiersch,  171 

Tholuck,  78,  123,  124,  154,  319 
Thoma,  152,  318 
Thomas  a  Kempis,  33 
Thomasius,  133 
Todd,  278 

Valentinus,  148 

Vaughan,  275,  278,  280 

Victor,  59 

Victorinus,  245 

Vincent,  270,  287 

Vischer,  289,  320 

Vitringa,  278,  282 

Vogel,  122,  289 

Volkmar,  125,  126,  152,  273,  274, 

278 
Volter,  289,  320 
Von  Soden,  170,  246 

Warfield,  141,  246 
Watkins,  155,  318 


Warren,  Bishop,  186,  305,  307 

Warschauer,  319 

Watson,  319 

Weiss,  Bernhard,  81,  113,  123,  154, 

162,  175,  208,  210,  244,  246,  278,' 

284,  297,  303,  317,  319,  320 
Weiss,  Johannes,  129,  320 
Weizsacker,    126,    152,    246,   278, 

289 
WcUhausen,  129,  246,  319,  320 
Wendt,  102,  318 
Wernle,  152,  170,  246 
Wesley,  33,  48,  181,  217,  276 
Westcott,  93,   103,   107,   113,  141^ 

148,  155,  160,  162,  169,  170,  171, 

189,  246,  288,  318,  319 
Wetstein,  209,  278 
Weyland,  289 
Whedon,  175 
Whichcote,  260 
Whiston,  210,  278 
Whitby,  210 
Wiclif,  271 

Wieseler,  138,  210,  246 
WilHams,  278 
Wolf,  210 

Wordsworth,  210,  275,  278,  282 
Workman,  135 

Xenophon,  10 

Zahn,  135,  140,  154,  233,  244,  246, 

278,  319 
Zeller,  125,  126,  128,  151,  171,  273 
Zinzendorf,  33 
Zwingli,  243,  262 


BS2601.H41 

John  and  his  writings  ... 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00029  9646 


